Passage to India Part One Essay Example for Free

Passage to India Part One Essay Summary: Chapter IV Mr. Turton invites several Indian gentlemen to the proposed Bridge Party at the club. The Indians are surprised by the invitation. Mahmoud Ali suspects that the lieutenant general has ordered Turton to hold the party. The Nawab Bahadur, one of the most important Indian landowners in the area, announces that he appreciates the invitation and will attend. Some accuse the Nawab Bahadur of cheapening himself, but most Indians highly respect him and decide to attend also. The narrator describes the room in which the Indian gentlemen meet. Outside remain the lowlier Indians who received no invitation. The narrator describes Mr. Grayford and Mr. Sorley, missionaries on the outskirts of the city. Mr. Sorley feels that all men go to heaven, but not lowly wasps, bacteria, or mud, because something must be excluded to leave enough for those who are included. Mr. Sorley’s Hindu friends disagree, however, as they feel that God includes every living thing. Summary: Chapter V At the Bridge Party, the Indian guests stand idly at one side of the tennis lawn while the English stand at the other. The clear segregation dismays Adela Quested and Mrs. Moore. Ronny and Mrs.  Turton disdainfully discuss the Indians’ clothing, which mixes Eastern and Western styles. Several Englishwomen arrive and discuss the earlier production of Cousin Kate. Mrs. Moore is surprised to note how intolerant and conventional Ronny’s opinions have become. Mr. Turton arrives, cynically noting to himself that each guest has come for a self-serving reason. Reluctantly, Mrs. Turton takes Adela and Mrs. Moore to visit a group of Indian ladies. Mrs. Turton addresses the Indian women in crude Urdu, and then asks Mrs. Moore and Adela if they are satisfied. One of the Indian women speaks, and Mrs.  Turton is surprised to learn that the women know English. Mrs. Moore and Adela unsuccessfully try to draw the Indian women out into more substantial conversation. Mrs. Moore asks one of them, Mrs. Bhattacharya, if she and Adela can visit her at home. Mrs. Bhattacharya agrees to host the Englishwomen the upcoming Thursday, and her husband promises to send his carriage for them. Mr. Fielding, who is also at the party, socializes freely with the Indians and even eats on the Indian side of the lawn. He is pleased to learn that Adela and Mrs. Moore have been friendly to the Indians. Fielding locates Adela and invites her nd Mrs. Moore to tea. Adela complains about how rude the English are acting toward their guests, but Fielding suspects her complaints are intellectual, not emotional. Adela mentions Dr. Aziz, and Fielding promises to invite the doctor to tea as well. That evening, Adela and Ronny dine with the McBrydes and Miss Derek. The dinner consists of standard English fare. During the meal, Adela begins to dread the prospect of a drab married life among the insensitive English. She fears she will never get to know the true spirit of India. After Adela goes to bed, Ronny asks his mother about Adela. Mrs.  Moore explains that Adela feels that the English are unpleasant to the Indians. Ronny is dismissive, explaining that the English are in India to keep the peace, not to be pleasant. Mrs. Moore disagrees, saying it is the duty of the English to be pleasant to Indians, as God demands love for all men. Mrs. Moore instantly regrets mentioning God; ever since she has arrived in India, her God has seemed less powerful than ever before. Summary: Chapter VI The morning after Aziz’s encounter with Mrs. Moore, Major Callendar scolds the doctor for failing to report promptly to his summons, and he does not ask for Aziz’s side of the story. Aziz and a colleague, Dr. Panna Lal, decide to attend the Bridge Party together. However, the party falls on the anniversary of Aziz’s wife’s death, so he decides not to attend. Aziz mourns his loving wife for part of the day and then borrows Hamidullah’s pony to practice polo on the town green. An English soldier is also practicing polo, and he and Aziz play together briefly as comrades. Dr. Lal, returning from the Bridge Party, runs into Aziz. Lal reports that Aziz’s absence was noticed, and he insists on knowing why Aziz did not attend. Aziz, considering Lal ill mannered to ask such a question, reacts defiantly. By the time Aziz reaches home, though, he has begun to worry that the English will punish him for not attending. His mood improves when he opens Fielding’s invitation to tea. Aziz is pleased that Fielding has politely ignored the fact that Aziz forgot to respond to an invitation to tea at Fielding’s last month. Analysis: Chapters IV–VI The wildly unsuccessful Bridge Party stands as the clear focus of this portion of the novel. Though the event is meant to be a time of orchestrated interaction, a â€Å"bridge† between the two cultures, the only result is heightened suspicion on both sides. Indians such as Mahmoud Ali suspect that Turton is throwing the party not in good faith, but on orders from a superior. Turton himself suspects that the Indians attend only for self-serving reasons. The party remains segregated, with the English hosts regarding their guests as one large group that can be split down only into Indian â€Å"types,† not into individuals. Though the Bridge Party clearly furthers our idea that the English as a whole act condescendingly toward the Indians, Forster also uses the party to examine the minute differences among English attitudes. Mrs.  Turton, for instance, represents the attitude of most Englishwomen in India: she is flatly bigoted and rude, regarding herself as superior to all Indians in seemingly every respect. The Englishmen at the party, however, appear less malicious in their attitudes. Mr. Turton and Ronny Heaslop are representative of this type: through their work they have come to know some Indians as individuals, and though somewhat condescending, they are far less overtly malicious than the Englishwomen. Cyril Fielding, who made a brief appearance in Chapter III, appears here to be the model of successful interaction between the English and Indians. Unlike the other English, Fielding does not recognize racial distinctions between himself and the native population. Instead, he interacts with Indians on an individual-to-individual basis. Moreover, he senses that he has found like-minded souls in Adela Quested and Mrs. Moore. Of the two, Fielding is more closely akin to Mrs. Moore than Adela: Fielding and Mrs. Moore are unself-conscious in their friendship with Indians, whereas Adela consciously and actively seeks out this cross-cultural friendship as an interesting and enriching experience. Forster fleshes out the character of Adela Quested significantly in these chapters. As part of this effort, the author uses Fielding as a sort of moral barometer, a character whose judgments we can trust. In this regard, we can see Fielding’s judgment of Adela—that she appears to object to the English treatment of the Indians on an intellectual, rather than emotional level—as Forster’s own judgment. Adela, perhaps because of this intellectual, unemotional curiosity about Indian culture, conducts her interactions in India in a negative sense rather than a positive one—attempting to not act like the other English rather than attempting to actively identify with Indians. Adela always acts s an individual, rejecting the herd mentality of the other couples at the English club. While the other English try to re-create England in India through meals of sardines and plays like Cousin Kate, Adela hopes to experience the â€Å"real India,† the â€Å"spirit† of India. Yet we sense that Adela’s idea of this â€Å"real India† is vague and somewhat romanticized, especially when compared to Mrs. Moore’s genuine interaction with Aziz or Fielding’s enthusiastic willingness to partake in Indian culture. The primary Indian protagonist, Aziz, develops in these chapters as significantly distinct from English expectations of Indian character. While the English pride themselves on dividing the Indian character into â€Å"types† with identifiable characteristics, Aziz appears to be a man of indefinable flux. Forster distinguishes Aziz’s various guises—outcast, poet, medical student, religious worshiper—and his ability to slip easily among them without warning. Aziz’s whims fluctuate in a way similar to his overall character. In Chapter VI we see Aziz shift from mood to mood in the space of minutes: first he wants to attend the Bridge Party, then he is disgusted with the party, then he despairingly mourns his dead wife, then he seeks companionship and exercise. Ironically, one of Aziz’s only constant qualities is a characteristically English quality: an insistence upon good breeding and polite manners. This quality makes Aziz slightly prejudiced—it leads him to reject his friendship with Dr. Lal—yet it also allows him to disregard racial boundaries, as when he feels automatically affectionate toward Fielding because of the Englishman’s politeness. Furthermore, Forster uses these chapters to begin to develop one of the major ideas he explores in A Passage to India—the inclusiveness of the Hindu religion, especially as compared to Christianity. Forster portrays Hinduism as a religion that encompasses all, that sees God in everything, even the smallest bacterium. He specifically aligns Mrs. Moore with Hinduism in the earlier scene from Chapter III in which she treats a small wasp kindly. The image of the wasp reappears in Chapter IV as the wasp that the Hindus assume will be part of heaven—a point on which the Christian missionaries Mr. Grayford and Mr. Sorley disagree. Mrs. Moore is a Christian, but in Chapter VI we see that she has begun to call her Christianity into question during her stay in India. Whereas God earlier was the greatest thought in Mrs.  Moore’s head, now the woman appears to sense something beyond that thought, perhaps the more inclusive and all-encompassing worldview of Hinduism. Summary: Chapter VII In every remark [Aziz] found a meaning, but not always the true meaning, and his life though vivid was largely a dream. (See 0pl,) Fielding’s many worldly experiences keep him from being insensitive toward Indians like the rest of the English are. The English mildly distrust Fielding, partly out of suspicion of his efforts to educate Indians as individuals. Fielding also makes offhand comments that distress the English, such as his remark that â€Å"whites† are actually â€Å"pinko-grey. Still, Fielding manages to remain friendly with the men at the English club while also socializing with Indians. Aziz arrives at Fielding’s for tea as Fielding is dressing. Though the two men have never met, they treat each other informally, which delights Aziz. Fielding breaks the collar stud for his shirt, but Aziz quickly removes his own and gives it to Fielding. The relations between the two men sour only briefly when Aziz misinterprets Fielding’s dismissive comment about a new school of painting to be dismissive of Aziz himself. Aziz is disappointed when Mrs.  Moore and Adela arrive, as their presence upsets the intimacy of his conversation with Fielding. The party continues to be informal, though, even with the women present. Aziz feels comfortable addressing the women as he would address men, as Mrs. Moore is so elderly and Adela so plain looking. The ladies are disappointed and confused because the Bhattacharyas never sent their carriage this morning as promised. Adela pronounces it a â€Å"mystery,† but Mrs. Moore disagrees—mysteries she likes, but this is a â€Å"muddle. † Fielding pronounces all India a muddle. Aziz denounces the rudeness of the Hindu Bhattacharyas and invites the women to his own house. To Aziz’s horror, Adela takes his invitation literally and asks for his address. Aziz is ashamed of his shabby residence and distracts Adela with commentary on Indian architecture. Fielding knows that Aziz has some historical facts wrong, but Fielding does not correct Aziz as other Englishmen would have. At the moment Fielding recognizes â€Å"truth of mood† over truth of fact. The last of Fielding’s guests, the Hindu professor Godbole, arrives. Aziz asks Adela if she plans to settle in India, to which Adela spontaneously responds that she cannot. Adela then realizes that, in making this admission, she has essentially told strangers that she will not marry Ronny before she has even told Ronny so herself. Adela’s words fluster Mrs. Moore. Fielding then takes Mrs. Moore on a tour of the college grounds. Adela again mentions the prospect of visiting Aziz’s house, but Aziz invites her to the Marabar Caves instead. Aziz attempts to describe the caves, but it becomes clear that Aziz has never seen them. Godbole has been to the caves, but he does not adequately describe why they are extraordinary; in fact, Aziz senses that Godbole is holding back information. Suddenly, Ronny arrives to take Adela and his mother to a polo match at the club. Ronny ignores the Indians. Aziz becomes excitable and overly intimate in reaction to Ronny’s rude interruption. Fielding reappears, and Ronny privately scolds him for leaving Adela alone with Indians. Before the ladies leave, Godbole sings an odd-sounding Hindu song in which the singer asks God to come to her, but God refuses. In her ignorance, [Adela] regarded [Aziz] as â€Å"India,† and never surmised that his outlook was limited and his method inaccurate, and that no one is India. (See Important Quotations Explained) Summary: Chapter VIII Driving away from Fielding’s, Adela expresses annoyance at Ronny’s rudeness. Adela mentions Aziz’s invitation to the Marabar Caves, but Ronny immediately forbids the women to go. Ronny mentions Aziz’s unpinned collar as an example of Indians’ general inattention to detail. Mrs. Moore, tired of bickering, asks to be dropped off at home. Adela feels suddenly ashamed of telling those at the tea party of her intention to leave India. After the polo match at the club, Adela quietly tells Ronny that she has decided not to marry him. Ronny is disappointed, but he agrees to remain friends with her. Adela sees a green bird and asks Ronny what type of bird it is. Ronny does not know, which confirms Adela’s feeling that nothing in India is identifiable. Ronny and Adela begin to feel lonely and useless in their surroundings; they suddenly feel they share more similarities than differences. The Nawab Bahadur happens by and offers Ronny and Adela a ride in his automobile. Riding in the back seat, the two feel dwarfed by the dark night and expansive landscape surrounding them. Their hands accidentally touch, and they feel an animalistic thrill. The car mysteriously breaks down on a road outside the city. They all climb out and determine that the car must have hit something, probably a hyena. After a short while, Miss Derek drives past them offers them a ride back to Chandrapore. Driving back to Chandrapore, Miss Derek jokes about her employer, an Indian noblewoman. Ronny and Adela feel drawn together by their shared distaste for Miss Derek’s crass manner and for the Nawab’s polite but long-winded speeches. When Adela and Ronny arrive back at the bungalow, Adela says that she would like to marry Ronny after all. He agrees. Adela, however, immediately feels a sense of disappointment, believing she will now be labeled the same as all the other married Englishwomen in India. They go inside and tell Mrs. Moore of their plans. Adela begins to feel more pleasant, joining Ronny in poking fun at the Nawab Bahadur. When Ronny and Adela tell Mrs.  Moore of the strange car accident, the older woman shivers and claims that the car must have hit a â€Å"ghost. † Meanwhile, down in the city of Chandrapore, the Nawab Bahadur describes the accident to others. He explains that it took place near the site where he ran over and killed a drunken man nine years ago. The Nawab Bahadur insists that the dead man caused the accident that occurred this evening. Aziz is skeptical, however, and feels that Indians should not be so superstitious. Analysis: Chapters VII–VIII Though Fielding himself disregards racial boundaries, his tea party does not quite develop into a successful version of the Bridge Party. Aziz and Adela both appear overexcited during the tea, while Mrs. Moore and Professor Godbole remain withdrawn from the others’ chatter. The sudden cultural interaction carries Adela away and convinces her, almost subconsciously, that she cannot remain in India and become a wife at the club—prompting the spontaneous admission that upsets Mrs. Moore. The tea sours when Ronny arrives, though his rudeness appears only to bring out tensions that already existed. Aziz becomes grotesquely overfamiliar, Adela blames herself and Ronny, Fielding becomes annoyed, and Mrs. Moore becomes spiritually drained by Godbole’s Hindu song. The tea party is further disturbed by a disparity between what Forster calls â€Å"truth of fact† and â€Å"truth of mood. † Thus far in A Passage to India, we have seen that the Indian characters often tend to say one thing when they mean another. Forster presents this tendency as problematic only for the English, among whom words are taken at face value. Indians appear skilled at identifying the undertones—the unspoken elements—of a conversation. Indeed, we see that Aziz recognizes from tone, rather than words, that Godbole is withholding information from his description of the Marabar Caves. Moreover, when Aziz invites Mrs. Moore and Adela to his house, the â€Å"mood† of his question—his sincere feeling of goodwill and hospitality to the Englishwomen—is all that Aziz means to convey. Adela, however, takes the invitation literally and asks for Aziz’s address. The misunderstanding makes Aziz uncomfortable, as he is in fact embarrassed about the appearance of his home. Fielding, too, reacts negatively to Adela’s literal-mindedness. This disconnect between cultural uses of language is an important division between the English and Indians in the novel. Forster explores another divide between the English and Indian cultures through the idea of naming or labeling. If the English in the novel always say exactly what they mean, they also are quick to attach names or labels to objects and people around them. When Adela and Ronny sit together at the club, Adela wonders aloud what kind of bird sits on the tree above them. Ronny does not know, which depresses Adela even more; meanwhile, the narrator notes that nothing is identifiable in India, as things disappear or change before one can name them. The British in India realize that with the ability to name or label things comes power. It is for this reason that Fielding’s remark that â€Å"whites† are really â€Å"pinko-grey† upsets the men at the club: by deflating labels like â€Å"white† and â€Å"brown,† Fielding implicitly challenges the assertive naming and labeling power of the English in India. If â€Å"white† really only refers to skin tone—rather than also connoting superiority, advanced religion, technology, and morality—then â€Å"whites† have no inherent right to rule India. Adela’s conflicted view of naming or labeling constitutes a major tension within her character. On the one hand, Adela recognizes that the ability to label gives one power—or, as she might say, a purpose or place in the world. India’s resistance to identification, symbolized by the nameless green bird, challenges Adela’s sense of individuality. On the other hand, Adela realizes that being on the receiving end of a label can leave one powerless. It is for this reason that she remains resistant to marrying Ronny, knowing that she will be labeled an Englishwoman in India—a club wife—and that her behavior will be restricted accordingly. When Adela feels her individuality challenged by India’s resistance to identification, she seems more likely to turn to Ronny for marriage; yet, when she recognizes the tyranny of labels like â€Å"Englishwoman in India,† she feels reluctant to marry Ronny. We see in these chapters that the natural environment of India has a direct effect on Ronny and Adela’s engagement. As soon as Adela tells Ronny she does not want to become engaged, their surroundings begin to overwhelm them, making them feel like lonely, sensual beings who share more similarities than differences. In particular, they feel that the night sky swallows them during their ride with the Nawab Bahadur. The sky makes Ronny and Adela feel indistinct as individuals, suddenly part of a larger mass that is somehow fundamentally united. Therefore, when their hands touch accidentally in the car, both Ronny and Adela are attuned to the animalistic thrill of sensuality. Their experience under the engulfing Indian sky draws Ronny and Adela together, forcing them to assert themselves as important, distinct individuals through a commitment to each other. Furthermore, the social environment of India—the Indians who surround Ronny and Adela—contributes to this shift in perspective in the couple’s relationship, their new feeling that they are more alike than different. Specifically, Ronny and Adela feel a bond through their shared distaste for Miss Derek and the Nawab Bahadur—a bond that leads Adela to suddenly reverse her decision and renew her engagement to Ronny. In this regard, Forster implies that the union of marriage requires a third presence, against which husband and wife can define themselves as similar. Indeed, after announcing their renewed engagement, Adela shows her openness to her future with Ronny through her willingness to make fun of the Nawab Bahadur with him. While Ronny and Adela feel a sense of unity against the muddle that is India, we see Mrs. Moore grow even more spiritually attuned to the minds of Indians. First Mrs. Moore appears to be most aligned with the religious figure of Professor Godbole. Godbole’s song, in which God is called but does not come, profoundly affects Mrs. Moore, deepening her sense of separation from her Christian God. Then, when Ronny and Adela tell Mrs.  Moore of their car accident with Nawab Bahadur, the elder woman strongly feels that a ghost caused the accident. Though Ronny and Adela ignore Mrs. Moore, we learn a short while later that the Nawab Bahadur, too, suspects that a ghost caused the accident—the ghost of the drunken man that he ran over nine years ago near the same spot. While Ronny and Adela begin to segregate themselves from the social and natural landscape that surrounds them, Mrs. Moore surrenders to the overwhelming presence and mysticism she feels in India, attuning herself to a sort of collective psyche of the land she is visiting.

Importance of Planning in Childcare Environment

Importance of Planning in Childcare Environment Vanessa Clare Every child is born unique; they have their own characteristics, personalities and interest. They developes at different rates, but do follow a similar development pattern, i.e. one child may begin to walk 9 months whereas another child may not begin to walk until they are 17-18 months. There may be many factors that also come into the equation when a child is developing, i.e. If a child is born premature or at term, if the child has any special educational needs or other disabilities which a child needs extra support for, weather there has been any long or short term illness, and the environment that the child is in, this includes the Childs social environment, also stress. A Childs growth and development is influenced by their learning and their influenced by the people and the environment around them. The EYFS document Development matters show the four themes that the Eyfs underpin all guidance, these are:- A unique child + positive relationships + enabling environments = learning and developments. When planning for a child it is best to get as much information on the child as possible, ask parents for information, as they are putting their most treasured procession in the safety of your care. Observe the childs free play to find out their likes, dislikes, strengths weaknesses, where you can support the child in their learning and environment. Anylise your finding using the four themes, principles and practice from the Development matters document. This helps to find out where a child is on their learning path, consider ways to strengthen their current learning development, showing guidance from positive relationships and enabling environments so that you can plan for the Childs learning and developments to fit their needs. As a practioner you will get to know each of your key children and will find other ways to work with the child alongside their planning. By following the planning, observations, assessment triangles you gain understanding of the Childs actual stage of develo pment, their interest and their particular needs , it will stop the you from planning activates and resources that may be too hard or easy for the child, or that the child does not find interesting. Activities that are too hard can negatively affect their confidence and self esteem, as they will not feel able to do it. Activities that are too easy will not hold their attention and they will lose interest quickly. By doing the observation, analysing and planning triangle it helps constantly review the Childs progress and share with the parents as required by the EYSF at two points, the prime areas between 24 and 36 months of age and at the end of the EYFS in the EYFS profiles. The EYFS breaks down the areas of learning into prime areas and specific areas, Prime areas are fundamental, work together, and move through to support development in all other areas Personal, social and emotional development Communication and language Physical development Specific areas include essential skills and knowledge for children to participate successfully in society Literacy Mathematics Understanding the world Expressive arts and design When planning activities you need to make sure that you are meeting all the children’s individual needs and requirements so the children are all treated equally. Putting into practice the equal opportunities which are essential. Equality, the practice of treating every on equally Diversity the practice of recognising and valuing individual characteristics and differences Inclusion an approach that makes sure that all children can participate to a full extent within their environment. A worldwide document that governs equal opportunities for all children is â€Å"The National Convention on the Right of the Child† this document outlines all basic human rights that all children are entitled to. All early years setting practitoners must follow this convention and empower the children in their care. The world made a promise to children nearly 25 years ago â€Å"that we would do every in or power to protect and promote their right to survive and thieve, to learn and grow, to make their voices heard and reach their full potential.† The convention defines a child as a person below the age of 18, unless the laws of a particular countries has set the legal age for adulthood younger. Young children often don’t realise that they have rights so it is up to adults to make sure that they know that they do, one of the rights relevant is the right for all children to have their views and opinions listened to and their best interest at heart. The EYSF requires all setting providers to have implemented a policy and procedures to promote the equality of opportunity of children in their care, and show support for children with special educational needs and disabilities. This policy should also cover how the individual needs of all the children will be met. All staff should have read and have understanding of their settings equal opportunities polices. All children should be given the same concern and attention and not all treated the same as this can be discriminating against them. A setting and their staff should provide an inclusive environment as this will challenge discrimination which will help to build a positive environment where children and their families will feel respected and valued, making them want to return. The equality act 2010 replaced all existing equality legislations and is in place protect individuals from discrimination. If children are discriminated against it can cause them to become withdrawn and could affect their development by causing delays. There are many ways that children could discriminate against, a few of these are due to their gender, social class, physical appearance, race and culture, it will lower their self esteem and confidence and they will start to question their beliefs. You must treat everyone the same no matter what their gender culture etc. This does not just apply to the children but to their families too. Any one working with children has to challenge their own views and beliefs and not show any prejudices to any of the children or their families so they want to return to the setting. To make a setting welcoming to children and their families welcome signs should be in multiple languages, staff should have a smile and a positive greeting when children a nd their families enter the setting, this creates a happy environment, learning a few words in the children’s own language helps build strong relationships. Support children in their own choices, when it comes to cultural /religious celebration these should be in place whether a child of that religion / culture is in the setting or not, ask for people that are from that culture or religion to come in and help promote to a higher standard so that the children get a fuller picture of the culture / religion or festival. Help children to feel they can come and talk, encourage children to build on their unique character and feel comfortable in themselves, helping them feel positive about their background which in turn will help them gain emotional well-being. By promoting good diversity children will be more accepting of other who are different from themselves. Children trust the adults that look after them to keep them safe and love them as do their parents as they are giving their most precious prize possession to look after and keep safe and happy .part of caring for a unique child is promoting their well-being , making them feel safe and secure in their environment. Key workers are essential as a first point of contact for the unique child and their family. The key worker spends time on a one to one with the child getting to know the needs of the child supporting them as they learn to spend time without their parents, and learning all about their interest, the key worker also helps support the parent in talking to them about the routines and likes and dislikes and aiming to follow them. Setting need to be set out for the children’s age and developmental stage, making sure that the environment is appropriate and safe for the children. Staffs ratios are a legal requirement, in the age group 0-24 months the ratios are one member of staff to every three children, from 24-36 months the ratio is one staff member four children and from 36-60 the children are more independent and have a greater knowledge of their own safety so the ration is one staff member to eight children, at this age children should be given rules, boundaries and activities that get the children to listen. Road safety Stanger danger awareness to personal safety should also be introduced at this age. As children grow they can be given the chance to learn about keeping safe themselves, encourage the child in making decisions give the child the power to say no if don’t want to join in. Promoting independence is an important part of growing and learning and becoming a unique child. And environment should be set out in an appropriate manner for the child. I.e a child of 0-12 months will need the toys in reach so they can chose themselves as they become mobile the environment should be set out so resources are at the child’s height and they can get them easily. A choice of healthy snack should be offered, from 12-24 months the environment should be accessible to the child and they should be voicing opinions which should be listened too, from 24-36 months children should be choosing what they want to play with, communicating is getting better and children should be having their opinions asked and listened to they should be continuing to help set up and tidy away to promot e independence and help with children following rules and boundaries. From 36-60 months children should enjoying independent choices they should be involved in the setting playing and communicating, ask the children what they would like to play with involving them in setting out their environment, at the same time setting boundaries. Setting should following the children’s act 1989 which promotes empowerment for children, making sure that they are involved in decisions that can affect their well being. Making sure that the children’s feelings and opinions are listened to, making sure that individual needs for the children and families are met, that children have their race, culture, language and religion are valued and respected and making sure that the well-being is of paramount importance. By using all of these when working with children you come to learn that all children are unique and by meeting all of their individual needs you are making sure that they are in a happy safe environment where they can grow and learn at their own pace feeling confident at doing so with the all the love support and resources that they need to do so. By meeting the unique Childs individual needs will help the child in five of the â€Å"Every Child Matters† outcomes. In staying safe, being healthy, enjoying and achieving, making positive contributions and achieving economic well-being.

A Summary Of Utilitarianism Philosophy Essay

A Summary Of Utilitarianism Philosophy Essay Utilitarianism, also known as the English common sense philosophy dominated the Western world during most of the nineteenth century. Utilitarianism is a normative ethical theory that places the seed of right and wrong solely on the outcomes (consequences) of choosing one action/policy over other actions/policies, hence also sometimes referred to as the Consequentialism. The history of this theory dates back to its true pioneer Jeremy Bentham ( 1748-1832) who gave rise to a new concept in hedonism: The Social Hedonism which was quite different from the Hedonistic doctrines of Aristipppus and Epicurus who are considered to be the fathers of Hedonistic school of thought. Bentham ; the common-sense British thinker is largely held responsible for the shift from egoistic (individualistic) hedonism to the Universalistic( social ) hedonism. He declared in his book Introduction to the Principles and morals and Legislation that all mankind is ruled by two basic masters; namely PAIN and PLEAS URE and that all human race is busy in the so-called rat-race of the pursuit of pleasure and the disapproval of pain.He also asserts that good can be equated with pleasure and evil with pain. Here comes in the big question that How should pleasures be graded as far as preference is concerned? Whether one should go for short-term and intense pleasures or long-term and mild pleasure take precedence over the former. He therefore came up with a detailed outline of principles regarding the preferences of pleasures in his Hedonic Calculus. According to Benthams calculus, he emphasized the significance of seven circumstances in order to determine the value of any action, hence presented a criteria for the preference of pleasures influenced by following major factors: Intensity: of the pleasure or pain that results Duration: of either of the two Certainity: The confirmation that pleasant event will be occurring. Promptness : The nearness of the pleasant event. Fecundity: Its ability to reproduce( lead to) more pleasure. Purity: freedom from either present or future. Extent: characterized by the number of people affected by the action John Stuart Mill(1806-1873) adjusted the more hedonistic tendencies in Benthams philosophy by emphasizing that it is not infact the quantity of pleasure, but the quality of happiness that is central to utilitarianism. He further argued that pleasure couldnt be quantified as stated by Bentham and can only be measured in terms of quality only. Mill advocates his rationality of ideas in the following famous words: It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better Socrates disstatisfied than a fool satisfied The implification of this advancement by Mill lead to a belief that the calculus is unreasonable (there is a distinction between higher and lower pleasures). According to Mill, utilitarianism now refers to the Greatest Happiness Principle GHP. it seeks to promote the capability of achieving happiness (higher pleasures) for the maximum number of people. The Maxim holds as such: Greatest happiness for the greater number Act and Rule Utilitarianism The principle of utility can either either be applied to PARTICULAR ACTIONS or GENERAL RULES. The former is called act-utilitarianism and the latter is called rule-utilitarianism. Act-utilitarianism The principle of utility is applied directly to each alternative act in a situation of choice. The right act is then defined as the one which brings about the best results( good or pleasure) (or the least amount of bad results/bad or harm). Rule-utilitarianism The principle of utility is used to determine the validity of rules of conduct (moral principles). A rule, like promise-keeping is established by keeping in view the consequences of the rule. This can be achieved by imagining a society/world in which people broke promises at will and a world in which promises were kept. Right and wrong are then defined as following or breaking those rules. Some criticisms of this position point out that if the Rules take into account more and more exceptions, Rule Utilitarianism collapses into Act Utilitarianism. More general criticisms of this view argue that it is possible to generate unjust rules according to the principle of utility. For example, slavery in Greece might be right if it led to an overall achievement of cultivated happiness at the expense of some mistreated individuals Critiques on the Utilitarian Theory: The first and foremost critique grounds its claim in the definition of the notion of happiness itself. According to various thinkers Happiness is a pretty relative term. What makes one person happy does not necessarily arouses the same sentiments in another individual. The practicality of the theory is challenged by saying that its not possible to decide whos happy and who is not? There is no justification of sacrificing the benefits of the minority in order to make the majority happy, no matter what. This simply undermines the notion of justice Utilitarianism has no universal set of rules on to which morality is based The sharpest criticism of Utilitarianism comes from its most celebrated critic: Kant. Kants Ethical Formalism holds that the rightness or wrongness of an act is an inherent quality which is independent of everything-time, place, circumstances, so on and so forth. Furthermore , this inherent or absolute quality of an act is independent of any results which follow from it, hence refuting CONSEQUENTIALISM altogether. Critiques on the Act Utilitarian Theory Criticisms of this view point to the difficulty of attaining a full knowledge and certainty of the consequences of our actions. According to some thinkers the consequences of acts cannot be predicted accurately and therefore refutes the argument of establishment of the rightness or wrongness of an act to begin with. One act doesnt have a single consequence. To the contrary, it leads to a multitude of consequences which is usually described as the Ripple Effect, hereby rendering the evaluation of an act as good or bad by looking at its consequences simply impossible. It is possible to justify immoral acts using Act Utilitarianism which is not justified and acceptable on any grounds. Critiques on the Rule Utilitarian Theory: Some criticisms of this position point out that if the Rules take into account more and more exceptions, Rule Utilitarianism collapses into Act Utilitarianism. More general criticisms of this view argue that it is possible to generate unjust rules according to the principle of utility. For example, slavery in Greece might be right if it led to an overall achievement of cultivated happiness at the expense of some mistreated individuals SUMMARY: KANTIANISM Immanuel Kant (1724 1804) stands as a milestone in the history of Western philosophy. Kants theory can be categorized as a deonotological because according to him, actions are not assessed to be morally permissible on the basis of consequences they produce, but rather on the persons will therefore his actions are based on duty and not consequences( henceforth refuting Utilitarianism right at the start). Monistic deontology as subjected by Kantianism is by far more consistent of a theory and can be universally applied to all beings. It is more plausible because even if the consequences of performing an action arent necessarily the best, the agent is still obligated to perform the action because it is their duty to do so. Therefore, ethically and morally they are doing the right thing.Kants theory revolves around Duty and Obligation. It is absolute since the morality of an action takes no regard of the situation it is in. Moral duty Kant said that we all experience an innate moral duty. The existence of the conscience and feelings of guilt and shame tell us when we violate this moral duty. He believed that our moral duty could be revealed to us through reason, objectively. His theory was based solely on duty. He said that to act morally is to perform ones duty, and ones duty is to obey the innate moral laws Moral duty Kant said that we all experience an innate moral duty. The existence of the conscience and feelings of guilt and shame tell us when we violate this moral duty. He believed that our moral duty could be revealed to us through reason, objectively. His theory was based solely on duty. He said that to act morally is to perform ones duty, and ones duty is to obey the innate moral laws. He believed that we are constantly in a battle with our inclinations our raw wants and desires. We should not act out of love or compassion.He preached the most celebrated view of Duty for Dutys Sake Kant said that its was not our duty to do what is impossible for us to do. For Kant, the fact that we ought to do something means that it is logically possible to do ought implies can. Moral statements are prescriptive; they prescribe an action. If ought implies can then the statement, I ought to do x, implies that I can do x. Kant said that we all aim to reach an ultimate end call the supreme good, the summum bonum a state in which human virtue and happiness are united. However, since it is impossible to reach this state in one lifetime, he deduced that we have immortal souls to succeed. Thus, Kant believed in an afterlife where there is a possibility of reaching the supreme good. For an afterlife to exists, Kant said God must exist to aid eschatological justice. For him, God was necessary for morality not the other way round he rejected all classical notions of theism. Moral statements Kant believed that there were two types of statement possible. First, a priori analytic statements such as 1 +1 = 2 are knowable without external research and contains predicate within it. However, statements that are a posteriori synthetic such as, Jack is a butler are knowable only by empirical examination it may be true or false. Kant contended that moral statements were a priori synthetic. We cannot prove what someone should do just by seeing so moral statements are a priori. However, moral statements may or may not be true, thus they are synthetic. Therefore, Kant concluded that moral statements where knowable only through reason since they are a priori and that there must be a method by which to verify whether the statement is true or false. Good will and duty Kant argues that the highest form of good is good will. To have good will is to perform ones duty. To do ones duty is to perform actions which are morally required and to avoid those actions which are morally forbidden. Kant said that we should perform our duty because it is our duty and for no other reason. To perform an action out of desire for any self indulgent consequences is not a morally good action. Duty is good in itself. Kant believed that we should act out of duty and not emotion. A human action isnt morally good because we feel its good, or because it is in our own self interest. Even if duty demanded the same action, but it was done for a motive such as compassion, the act would be a good act, but the person would not be moral (virtuous) for choosing it. Kant is said to have devised a system of ethics based on reason and not intuition. A moral person must be a rational being. Being good means having a good will. A good will is when I do my duty for the sake of that duty. I do my duty because it is right, and for no other reason. But what does it mean to act out of duty? Kant explained that to act out of duty is to perform actions which are morally obligatory and not to perform those that are forbidden. The categorical imperative: It is the basis of Kants moral system and may be formulated as follows: Act as if the maxim of your actions were to become through your will a general Natural law The categorical imperative helps us to know which actions are obligatory and which are forbidden. Hypothetical imperatives are conditional: If I want x then I must do y. These imperatives are not moral. For Kant, the only moral imperatives were categorical: I ought to do x, with no reference to desires or needs. There are three main formulations of the categorical imperatives. 1.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The universal law -The ability to universalize: All moral statements should be general laws, which apply to everyone under any circumstances. There should be no occasion under which an exception is made. 2.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Treat humans as ends in themselves -Respect: Kant argues that you should never treat people as a means to some end. People should always be treated as ends in themselves. This promotes equality. 3.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Act as if you live in a kingdom of ends -Autonomy: Kant assumed that all rational agents were able to deduce whether an argument was moral or not through reason alone and so, all rational humans should be able to conclude the same moral laws. Kant sought to create a framework by which one could discover which moral statements were true and which were false. Immorality thus involves a violation of the CI and is thereby irrational. Other philosophers, such as Locke and Hobbes, had also argued that moral requirements are based on standards of rationality. However, these standards were either desire-based instrumental principles of rationality or based on sui generis rational intuitions Freedom Kant believed that we are free to make rational choices. Reason is what distinguishes us from animals. We have to be free to do our duty. But if we cant be free then we cannot truly be moral agents. Ought no longer implies can. Critiques on the KantinianTheory: Kants refusal to allow any exceptions to a maxim is incompatible with modern politics. In war, the sacrifice of the few for the many is necessary. Kant does not allow this. Kant cannot distinguish between conflicting duties. Kants concept of universalisability encounters problems. How similar do two moral dilemmas have to be to be covered by the same maxim? Critics object that the categorical imperative, as circumscribing the form of morality, is often too ambiguous, even empty of application Kants refusal to allow and exceptions to a maxim is incompatible with modern politics. In war, the sacrifice of the few for the many is necessary. Kant does not allow this. Critics of Kants approach claim that his Categorical Imperative does not contain within it a way to resolve conflicts of duties. Lying is wrong can be interpreted as Never lie and thus Universal Principles can harden into Absolute Principles

T.S. Eliots use of Poetic techniques in The Lovesong of J. Alfred Prufr

T.S Eliot, widely considered to be one of the fathers of modern poetry, has written many great poems. Among the most well known of these are â€Å"The Waste Land, and â€Å"The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock†, which share similar messages, but are also quite different. In both poems, Eliot uses various poetic techniques to convey themes of repression, alienation, and a general breakdown in western society. Some of the best techniques to examine are ones such as theme, structure, imagery and language, which all figure prominently in his poetry. These techniques in particular are used by Eliot to both enhance and support the purpose of his poems. The theme of Prufrock is the negative, individuality repressing effect that society has on its people. The Prufrock persona illustrates this, he is alienated by the inane social rituals that define his life, â€Å"I have measured out my life with coffee spoons† and make it insignificant and useless. The Waste Land’s theme is that the world, in particular western civilisation, is a culturally and spiritually barren place. Society is portrayed as a pile of â€Å"†¦stony rubbish†¦Ã¢â‚¬ , the ruins of a once great city now reduced to rubble where nothing can grow. Lives mean nothing, but the poem also offers hope through a return to basic religious values, ending with the repeated chant of â€Å"Shantih shantih shantih†, which means, â€Å"the peace which passeth understanding†. The poems both portray the same basic idea, but they have two main differences. Firstly, there is the way in which the themes are expressed. In Prufrock , Eliot uses a pers ona as an example of the debilitating effect of living with so many expectations, rules, standards and meaningless rituals has on a the individual. In many ways, this is a very effe... .... Figuring very prominently is Dante, with the epigraph in Prufrock an exact quote from Inferno, and more subtle references found in The Waste Land that are very suggestive of a Dantean descent into hell. Dante, and to a lesser extent Joseph Conrad, from whom Eliot derives a certain amount of horror, which subtly complements his themes, have had a profound impact on Eliot’s writing. He chooses to quote or allude to parts of other works that complement his own. The techniques used by Eliot in creating both The Waste Land and Prufrock, are used in largely similar ways as far as furthering his purpose, yet differ slightly in style or small alterations when examined more closely. Some techniques, such as imagery, are more similar than others. Though he may use devices differently for each poem, it is only in such a way that makes them unique, and conveys his purpose.

Black Bean Revival :: Coffee Drinks Essays

Black Bean Revival Sitting in a corner or side booth with eyes bulging and steam rising from the small bowl of brew while pondering or talking was the common site of coffee shop goers that I’ve run across in my travels. Fueled by an interest as to why people buy more coffee than books at my former employment and why my mother orders coffee through a catalog for coffee drinkers by coffee drinkers is my search for reason and understanding behind the coffee bar explosion. The coffee shop revival and interest in high priced brew by the well to do is something that has been around for some time in the more metropolitan areas. In Seattle, Washington the whole coffee shop revival for generation X hit during the time that the grunge music genre developed. Not that everyone could afford the high priced brew, but that it was a place to hang out during the day and help keep the pied eyes open. A couple popular sleeper movies such as â€Å"Singles† and â€Å"So I Married an Ax Murder† have showed how some people’s routines often gravitate to the coffee shop. The show â€Å"Friends† also shows that in a more late 90’s perspective. This would seem to characterize certain divisions in clientele, but not so here in Fargo. Like many other genres that were part of a sub-culture, they, the neighborhood coffee shop are eventually making their way to the mainstream Around this area where the coffee shop trend is growing but not totally established, you might think that the strong shops are the ones that are incorporated or affiliated with a major nationwide branch. By this I mean that the shop has a network of personnel higher on the ladder to lend support from the company at large. Now this doesn’t mean that the smaller locally owned shops such as Atomic Coffee, Noah’s and Trentino’s aren’t successful; they are and at times just as busy or more so than their chain store counterparts. About the only upper hand that national chains have on the smaller local shops is the mass marketing to consumers through other chains such as Target and Daytons. What the smaller shops tend to do is include the community more. They advertise more local happenings and going on’s such as poetry readings and poetry slams, to an open mic night that would include music and other thought provoking talents that their customers poss ess.

Functionalism in Education

? Having attended public schools throughout my childhood and adolescence, I never was familiar with the term functionalism and its many elements. After observing and analyzing my field placement classroom I have come to understand the concept of functionalism to some extent. In general, functionalists â€Å"see schools as serving to socialize students to adapt to the economic, political, and social institutions of that society† (Feinberg, p. 6, 2004). They also theorize that in order for societies to survive, they must carry out vital functions such as, attaining fundamental knowledge and acquiring essential skills and proficiency, acknowledging certain norms and values within their community, and recognizing authority figures. It is also believed that social solidarity and role differentiation are the primary aspirations for a society and is achieved by means of the educational system. I can recall instances from my schooling experience, where functionalist aspects were taught and are presently being utilized in the classroom I observed. Some of the various features of functionalism that I identified within the classroom are hidden curriculum, role differentiation and specificity, which I will be addressing, more in depth throughout this paper. The classroom I analyzed from Smith Junior High consists of six special education students between the ages of 13 to 17. A majority of the students are racially diverse and come from a low income household. These students are classified as moderately mentally disabled and each have an IEP, which include their present level of academic achievement and functional performance. The setting of the classroom is comprised of a structured yet uncomplicated curriculum, where their teacher Angi Root, incorporates practical and efficient learning strategies. The entire curriculum is based upon the concept of functioning in every day situations so I was able to identify numerous functional activities. My first observation of the class was on January, 29th at 12pm in the afternoon. The students were just arriving back in the room from lunch and were quite boisterous because I was in the room. As soon as their teacher, Mrs. Root asked them to settle down, they instantly became silent. This is an example of an unspoken expectation of the teacher and is one of many hidden curriculums that I witnessed in the classroom. Another instance was during instruction; Mrs. Root had asked a question pertaining to shapes and who ever knew the answer, demonstrated this particular hidden curriculum by raising their hand. The functionalist concept, hidden curriculum, is best defined as â€Å"organizational features and routines of school life that provide the structure needed to develop the psychological dispositions appropriate for work and citizenship in industrial society† (Feinberg, p. 1, 2004). It is intended to assist in achieving norms, learning one’s position in society, and how to think of oneself. Hidden curriculum has also been explained as making the transition from family to the real world less difficult. This concept applies to the examples I gave because when the teacher asked the students to settle down, they instantly knew that they needed to follow directions. The idea that teachers are authority figures and deserve to be respected is instilled in children at a very young age and is expected to be upheld. As for students raising their hands when wanting to speak or answer a question, this has also been implanted in children’s minds and is a norm in today’s society. I conducted my second observation the following week on Monday, February 2nd, in the morning at 9am. The students had just barely arrived to school and it was the first day back after the weekend. Mrs. Root began the day by allowing the kids to choose their designated job o the week. The six jobs the students can select from are line leader, door holder, paper passer, sharpening pencils, turning the lights on/off, and errand runner. The kids get so excited about choosing their job or â€Å"role† for the week. This motivates them and makes them want to become more efficient and responsible. Functionalists dispute over the fact that all members within a society are compelled to perform different tasks. The concept of role differentiation is found in almost all communities and guarantees that even the most unpleasant jobs are completed. The process of selecting and fulfilling a classroom responsibility helps student’s form a personal identity of themselves. Role differentiation facilitates individuals to gain a sense of belonging in their society and helps build their character. It also assists them in learning responsibility which they can apply to every day life. My final observation took place on Tuesday, February 3rd, at 2:30pm. I was able to observe the teacher, Mrs. Root, enact the norm of specificity. One of the students, a girl named Shelby, is required to wear leg braces because she has a difficult time walking. When walking to Adapted P. E, we had to travel up stairs, which proved to challenging for Shelby. So she wouldn’t trip and fall, Mrs. Root helped Shelby maneuver up the steps until she was safely at he top. Another student named Marcus asked why we didn’t help him up the steps. Mrs. Root answered, saying that Shelby has a harder time getting up the stairs then he does. While Marcus can easily run up and down the steps twenty times, Shelby can barely make it up once with assistance. Specificity â€Å"refers to the treatment of a person in terms of some standardized basis of comparison† (Feinberg, p. 19, 2004). Universalism, which is equal treatment of individuals, is quite the opposite of the term specificity, permitting exceptions to be made for special circumstances. In lieu of the observations I made, Mrs. Root used her judgment on how to handle the situation of fairness. Instead of requiring the same treatment for all her students, certain exceptions are made for individuals with specific needs and disabilities. Overall, I was surprised to discover exactly how many differential functionalist aspects were actually utilized in the classroom I observed. Analyzing the roles and behaviors of the students and teacher, I now feel I have a greater grasp on the functionalist concepts. As for my view on functionalism, I am a bit concerned with the increasing diversity of school populations and the effect this is having on teaching functionalism in schools. At Smith Junior High, where I conducted my observations, â€Å"curriculum mapping†, which is quite the opposite of functionalist ideals, was being used by most of the teachers. There are many challenges that must be dealt with, in regards to this, because of the â€Å"No Child Left Behind Act†. I am not in opposition to the cohesion of different ethnic groups but am worried about the direction public schools are taking. I sense that the main functionalist approaches taught in public schools may become phased out, which in turn, will be extremely detrimental for the society as a whole.

Compare the Roles That Elizabeth Proctor and Abigail Williams Play in The Crucible Essay

A mother, a wife, a friend: Abigail wanted to share a family with John Proctor. In some aspects she was jealous of Elizabeth, as she had the one thing in the world that Abigail desperately yearned for. â€Å"Oh, I marvel how such a strong man may let such a sickly wife be† We can see here that Abigail is being sarcastic to manipulate Proctor in falling for her. â€Å"Oh† shows she is taking a calm and subtle approach to get what she wants. Though Abigail is pretending to be angry at Elizabeth for being the cause of Proctors rejection towards her, we can clearly see that the empowering emotion over here is envy, towards Elizabeth and Proctors marriage. Abigail resorts to name calling to cast doubt in Proctors mind and she attempts to compliment Proctor to try and get a taste of everyday life as Elizabeth. The Status’s and reputation’s of the people in Salem were shockingly important to them. Labels and stereotypes were incredibly common and the people tried their utmost best to protect their prominence. To the locals Abigail Williams was an innocent orphan and the niece of the reverend, other than this they did not think much of her. So when she went out of her way to accuse the respected people and it became public gossip about the truth of her affair, Abigail’s cherished esteem in the community was suddenly questioned. â€Å"(In a temper): My name is good in the village! I will not have it said my name is soiled! Goody Proctor is a gossiping liar! † Arthur Miller has used short sentences to show the reader that Abigail is extremely angry; this is a quote from act 1, therefore it gives the reader an impression of Abigail’s character. Miller wanted to show the true colours of Abigail’s persona and he was successful in this. The exclamation marks shows the emphasise of her words, Abigail is fuming at this point and concentrates all that irritation at Elizabeth. From a orphanage, it was obviously hard for her to compose a â€Å"good name† for herself; however Abigail’s determination had driven her to demand a better life for herself. She did not want all her accomplishments to be shattered by â€Å"Elizabeth’s lies†, so tried to criticise her by calling her a â€Å"liar†. This challenges her character as the readers are perfectly aware of Abigail’s dishonest nature, we all know that she is the one who is deceitful and craves vengeance, and Elizabeth is the direct opposite. From the beginning of the play Abigail’s intentions were clear, she obviously wanted to develop her relationship with John Proctor and gain his respect. Abigail was a young, naive and narrow-minded maid who did anything to save herself, no matter who she disappointed along the way. Elizabeth was a totally different person. Elizabeth’s motivation came from the passion of raising her family; she wanted to restore the trust in her marriage to Proctor, for the benefit of her children. She was much older, wiser and she devoted her life to her religion. I wake and walk about the house as though I’d find you comin’ through some door† Miller gives a childish effect to this quote and makes Abigail sound like a love struck puppy, this reminds the reader that she is only a teenager. This quote illustrates that her love towards Proctor is enduring and it also demonstrates her repulsion towards Elizabeth. The witch trials were an obvious case of McCarthyism, the court of Salem did not require much evidence for prosecution. It was simply unjust! The people at the bottom of the social hierarchy system had an even inferior chance for survival. Although the people were given a chance to avoid death by â€Å"confessing to their sins†, this was an excessive act and showed that the people were deprived of rights. Elizabeth is understood to be extremely pious; she controls her emotions and buries her feelings of anger towards Abigail to avoid any uncontrollable outbursts of extreme emotions and frustration. However Abigail takes pride in her hysteria. This highlights the fact that the age difference between these 2 women is phenomenal. â€Å"He have his goodness now. God forbid I take it from him! Elizabeth is much more composed than Abigail, even though she is losing her husband she is happy for him, as she believes he is now at peace. Throughout the play John struggles with his feelings that he was not a good man. Hale tried his best to save John from being hanged to death but Elizabeth believes that he is finally going to be cleansed of his sins, as he has finally come out the dark about his affair. She loves him so much that she is willing to let him go. She feels that he is doing the right thing. She takes the name of God to justify herself. A Selfish, stubborn and shameless stray: Abigail was not the forgiving type. Once someone had double crossed her, she did not take it lightly; Abigail created fear in the hearts of her peers. She even turns against her friends to make her story more convincing. Due to the fact that her parents were shot in front of her, she has never learnt to accept this and this has limited her well- being, so she blames every one else. On the other hand Elizabeth was selfless and even though her â€Å"loyal† husband betrayed her integrity, she learnt to overcome this and forgave him. (in agony): My husband-is a goodly man, sir. † Unlike Abigail, Elizabeth has never told a lie in her life, however the one time it would save her life, she tried to save her husbands reputation. This may be an act to show forgiveness to Proctor as she may have thought it was her last opportunity to see him. She dedicated her life to being a good Puritan so wanted Proctor to live a peaceful and guilt- free life without her. However she may have felt that it was her duty to conceal the truth for her husband’s case, as she has been the one who has been more interested in preserving appearances. If they put aside their detestation towards each other, then they would actually have more in common than they let on. Firstly, they are in love with the same man, they are both religious and they both aspire to fulfil their motives (whatever they may be). Although they have extremely different intensions that drive them, they are both very ambitious and stubborn. They both try to exert influence on society as they want to be remembered after their deaths. Also, in the end they both lie, although for alternating reasons.