Designing Clinical Research Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 8500 words

Designing Clinical Research - Assignment Example As it is indicated these journal entries are records of ongoing events, and in as far as my journal is concerned, this will not only reflect the account of my activities, these will also include my emotions and beliefs, records of my personal interactions, my interpretations of information and academic reading, and I hope my beliefs on these topics will be reflected in these journal entries. Conceptually, if there would have been no problems or questions, there would have been no need for research. This means for every research there would be an inquiry, which is an attempt to confirm existing knowledge or seek new knowledge grounded on the old one. Seeking knowledge in different forms is human nature. Of course there will always be some people who will accept any information without question. However, some will ask questions to express disbelief, show discontent, corroborate information, or to seek new knowledge. This is only possible if people question the existing, not satisfied with the existing. Polit and Beck (2007) referred research to be a systematic inquiry. This means if one desires to question something systematically, he has also responsibility to frame a disciplined method to corroborate or refute information or findings. If existing knowledge on any subject is found to be inadequate or inaccurate, then a properly designed research question is the only way to access, derive, develop, refine, expand, or establish new knowledge (Polit and Beck 2007). It has been stated that this question would hint to the research problem, and in this way research questions actually sets the stage of the research. Thus the specific questions regarding unexplored area of study is important in that these designate the areas that a researcher plans to systematically investigate further through a disciplined process and method. This indicates research questions are notations of inquiry to explore the research problem. Research questions would also specify the purpose of the study addressing the problem further. These statements conform to the reading from the first chapter of our text and relevant discussions on how to conceive a research problem. In fact while reflecting on this, I found that actually conceptualizing research questions can give us directions of research. In that sense, the scientific, healthcare, or medical research that I had come across can lead to many new research questions, since all research articles I came across have limitations, and there are many unanswered questions in all studies. Although many studies come to an acceptable conclusion, I think almost all studies indicate further research based on the remaining research questions or new questions based on that research. Thus I feel all research accounts despite adding new dimensions of knowledge pose new research questions which can be the beginning of a new research and hence now avenues of advancing knowledge, and this may in itself, be quite exciting. Hulley et al (2007) recognize precisely this distinction between the "anatomy" and the "physiology" of research. The anatomical part of research (for the authors) includes all of the technical aspects of research that are

Happiness and People Essay Example for Free

Happiness and People Essay What does happiness mean to you? According to the dictionary happiness means â€Å"a pleasurable or satisfying experience†. Most people believe that happiness is simply a state of well-being; to me, happiness is more complex. True happiness is anything that brings feelings of true joy to an individual’s life. For example, Barry Schwartz a psychologist who spoke in the Ted Talk lecture scenes said the secret to true happiness is having low expectations or being able to make good choices. I agree with him because happiness comes from how you perceive things that makes you happy. Everyone finds or gains happiness in different ways. One can gain happiness through relationships and themselves or their loved ones, while others gain happiness through buying material goodies like things that makes them happy. I remember a time when I was shopping at Macys I came upon the purse section of the store and I saw the purse that I have been wanting for a long time. At the time I didn’t buy the purse because it was too expensive, but now it was marked down at thirty percent, which is a good deal. I was so happy when I bought it because I liked the color and the purse was big enough for me to fit my iPad. In addition, when it comes to relationships I think anyone would be happy because you actually feel like you’re protected and loved. This feeling makes you happy that you have someone who cares about you and remembers your birthday or anniversary. My boyfriend whom I have dated for a long time bought me an anniversary gift; I can’t believe he remembered because I forgot about it. I have been so busy with school that I lost track of important dates, I even forgot my father birthday. So the moment I received the gift I cried because I couldnt believe that he remembered it, which was shocking to me. I think that anytime you buy something you are interested in or you receive something from a best friend you will always appreciate it and feel happy because you get what you wanted and someone cares about you. When you buy more expensive merchandise vs. inexpensive merchandise does it really make you happy? A great example that I thought was Benjamin Wallace speech on the Ted Talk lecture on the â€Å"Price of Happiness†. He conducted a wine tasting experiment to see if some people could determine the difference between the most expensive wine bottles and the cheapest wine bottles. It was determined that the majority of the people who bought the most expensive wine assumed that its a better quality but it is just as good as the cheap bottle of wine. I think that anytime you buy a expensive bottle of wine it makes you feel happy and hoping that maybe it will taste good but inexpensive wine is just as good. Another significant aspect Wallace said was that with happiness is having strong relationships. Whether it’s with your family, friends, co-workers, teachers and team mates, having a strong relationship with the people you are close to brings happiness. I agree with Wallace because my family is important to me, without my family I wouldn’t know where I would be, they have supported me through college and have been giving me good advice on how to be successful in life and schools. Also, my best friends have been there for me too, they have goals and I have goals too. Neil Pasricha, author of The Book of Awesome, and came up with the three A’s said, when it comes to happiness it is consist of the three As which are Attitude, Awareness and Authenticity. He believes that no matters how difficult a situation is always move forward and take baby steps in to the future and embracing your inner self and the people around you in additions to following your heart when you put yourself in places and situation and conversation that you love and enjoy. Even though relationships can ruin some people’s lives and their self-esteem, you can still mend that relationship by bonding to make a new strong relationship. I believe that having a strong relationship with the people you love and the people who you work with is important because not only does it bring happiness from within you, it is also important because it helps you improve your connection on working with the other people. It can also help when you’re going through a hard time; the people you have a strong relationship with can help you along the way. Others said it’s not just seeing that relationship becoming strong it’s seeing it improves along the way. Being happy with yourself is another way people finds happiness. As the great Aristotle said, â€Å"Happiness depends upon us. † Some people measure their happiness on how successful they are, or how much they have accomplished. Others become happy with themselves by just helping others and giving back. Helping people in need, or giving food to the poor can make a person feel better about themselves which then makes them happier with themselves. In order to make other people happy, you have to make yourself happy first. You cannot be happy for others if you are not happy. In the past when I was a high school student I have volunteer at the Salvation Army and the Neighbor’s Place. I was helping family in need. There were times when my family would donate food to the Neighbor’s place for people who come once a month for food like a special holiday. I also did the bell ringing for the Salvation Army to raise money for Christmas gifts for the children. At my church, I have volunteered to join a Christian group to raise money for the children in Laos. Our mission was to build a school for the children and provide the necessary tools for the instructor and the student. We have been on this mission for many years and were able to accomplish it now, which was great. In addition, we have also raised money to help provide clean water to villages in Laos, there were pictures taken and of both the water system and the school that was built. I was so happy when we have raised enough money for the children and the people of Laos. I am happy when I have done good things for the people. I wanted to help them as much as I can but it can be hard sometimes but you just have to be strong and have as much confidence in yourself as possible. In conclusion, happiness is a given, anyone can be happy. You can be happy when you are with your family or your friends, even your boyfriend. Sometimes buying the things you want or watching a movie, reading a book or playing music, eating food, winning a prize and having a certificate of achievement. All this makes you happy, but what important is that you are happy with yourself and you are proud of yourself. In the past I have done many successful things and I hope to continue those things because it makes me who I am. There had also been times when I won competitions and won an award for it. I like to say that happiness is a decision you make, and sometimes there will be hard times but that doesn’t change who you are as long as you feel happy about yourself and meeting you long or short term goals.

History of Rome and the Servile Wars

History of Rome and the Servile Wars Can we understand the servile wars and revolt of Spartacus in terms of a proletariat uprising against Rome? My research focused on the view of slavery as such within the Roman empire from 140 B.C to 70 B.C. My hypothesis is that the Servile wars and Spartacus revolt, did lead to a proletariat uprising against Rome, but these caused the revolt, not the lower classes themselves. However, my main research question, identifies cultural problems in the history of slavery, in terms of the uprising and open revolts against Rome staring with the servile wars, leading through to Spartacus, and how this caused the uprising, as the challenge to roman rule was a direct follow on from the events that preceded it. My aim, therefore, is to show how the impact of the institution of slavery on roman society at large and identify the responses and resistance, in order to show how slavery was integral in roman society, which would inevitably lead to a proletariat uprising. The slave rebellions were extraordinary in Roman time, nothing like them had ever happened before and after the final suppression of Spartacus in 70 B.C, no comparable rising ever took place again.[1] In terms of a reaction from ancient scholars, our evidencestems almost wholly pro roman sources; at best from writers who saw no moral justification in servile revolutions as such[2], indicating somewhat of a bias towards infolding events. Modern scholars such as Bradley and Green, have shown that the uprisings stemmed from the ruthlessness of the Romans military expansion, this can be supported by the fact that, territorial expansion in the Roman empire is considerably linked with the use of slavery, as warfare became inextricably linked with economic growth[3]. To focus on slave, therefore, in terms of the events creating a proletariat uprising, we must consider the views of the ancient and modern scholars, as well as Marxist thought, in order to reason why the wars created the issue of an uprising as slavery has its origins in the deepest mists of antiquity, usually arising from putting prisoners of war to servitude as reparation[4]. In terms of the servile wars, although they were the first warning of an assault against the Romans from a slave perspective, in regard to a proletariat uprising, it didnt have as much of an effect as Spartacus did, and that is why this essay focuses largely on the success of Spartacus in the sense of an uprising. The first slave war had its begging in Enna, this was significant as Sicily had become the first overseas province in the wake of the first war against Carthage, 264 B.C 241 B.C[5]. The massacre which would ensue the destruction of Enna led to full control being taken, leading to complete possession of the area. The prosperity of Siciliy drew comment from Diodorus a land so rich in grain[6] signifying why the Romans wanted it, and furthermore its slaves for economic purposes. Diodorus gives two different accounts of the motives that instigated the slave rebellion. In the first, they are entirely private and domestic. A group of house slaves have been driven to desperate ac tion by the ill treatment they have suffered at the hands of their master and his wife. In the second version, the slaves are clearly deputies from a much larger and more general body. The first version is Roman propaganda, designed to minimise the political motives of the uprising.[7] This clearly identifies the means of a proletariat uprising as early propaganda aimed to stop any kind of opposition before it even began. Furthermore, Diodorus gives the usual catalogue of child-murder and rape[8], this supports the fact mentioned earlier, as many sources came from pro-romans, who didnt support any kind of uprising, so they portray the rebels as doig horrible things in order to stem other citizens participation. In addition, various testimonia suggest that the majoriy of sicilain slaves were field labourers, the chain gangs of the ergastula[9]this only intensifies the proletariat uprising, as with legitimate forms of protest denied them, the Roman plebeians resorted to military tacti cs in abortive but violent attempts to end the widespread debts and break up the latifundia[10]. This, then can argue that Diodorus considered the violence of the Sicilian masters and the power they had over their slaves was a key factor in the outbreak of the rebellions. The Sicilian slave uprisings were suggestive of long-term social change that was required, and though they do signify problems that would lead to an uprising, it was mainly Spartacus actions, that would make Roman society contest the higher powers. The slave rebellions aided as an excuse for the men to release their anger against their owners, this is supported by the fact that the Sicilian slave wars, were essentially revolts of an agricultural workers contesting their own owners rule. The biggest uprising of the three major slave wars in the Roman republic was the last of them, the rebellion of the gladiator Spartacus. The war raged through the core of Italy, not in Sicily like the previous rebellions had, and this significantly challenged Roman power and authority. In the case of the revolt, its importance in linking in to a proletariat uprising is imperative, this is due to the fact that it began as only a few slaves escaping, whereas what it became is hugely important. Slaves did not have much of a common identity, except where they were a conquered people[11]. This led to an escalation of individuals who had grown distasteful of roman citizen rule over the lower class. This suggestively links with modern Marxist thought, and is significant in arguing why Spartacus began the proletariat uprising against Rome. Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes[12] This quote from the communist manifesto, links heavily with the problems non-roman citizens faced, as the escaped slaves that began the revolt were the lowest-ranking members the roman society. I argued earlier that despite their importance, the servile wars were not as significant s Spartacus revolt in terms of a proletariat uprising against Rome. This can be supported by add Marxist quote from Doc 3, this clearly shows his visionary leadership in objection of the oppressing rule. Thus, the complexity of the argument changes somewhat, as its no longer just about slaves, it is about all citizenry contesting roman rule, which occurred after the defeat of Spartacus. In terms of the occurrences during Spartacus revolt, limitations on the sources used again must be considered , as like Diodorus, pro-roman writers contested any happenings of an uprising as such. limitations of the literary sources that provide our evidence. There are only a handful of accounts of the war, and the fullest of these were composed centuries after the events they describe. Importantly, no account of the war from the view of Spartacus himself or any of the rebels exists. What remains is the representation of the revolt that was written by ancient scholars who believed slavery to be part of the hierarchical society norm. It is important to note that the uprisings that occurred heavily linked to the roman economy. Capua were Spartacus revolt began prior to its defection of Hannibal had previously been Romes equal[13], this is significant as it shows why slavery was so rife as it was the center for bronze manufacturing and the extraordinary production of grain and relied on a large servile population[14]. Capua had access to a certain amount of wealth and manumission was sufficiently practiced to allow the assimilation of some slaves with established frameworks of authority. Thus, collaboration with the status quo was once responsive to servitude that could at times lead to really social advancement[15]. This can be supported by the fact that Bradley argues that the violence of the revolt was the product of the violence slave owners themselves had long fostered into their slaves[16], this is important as it shows why the battle engaged so many to up rise against roman rule. Furthermore, he argues that the escalation of the revolt of gladiators into a sustained war of servile resistance cannot possibly have been what they hoped to achieve when they made their escape from Capua.[17] It is important to note that at the time of the uprising lead by Spartacus gladiatorial contest where still in the process of becoming prolific entertainment[18] and so early witnesses to the sport didnt understand the barbaric actions of some gladiator owners. First of all, it is important to note that Gladiators tended to be the first-generation slaves[19] and so thus, a proletariat uprising led by Spartacus was significant as the attractiveness of manumission was a motivating impulse[20] to most slaves who joined the rebellion. This is significantly supported by the fact that Spartacus practice of equally dividing the spoils and special inducement for encouraging discontented agricultural workers to join the movement[21] increased the number of radicals joining the movement. He wasnt like most leader s as he had been subject to the horrors of slavery himself, and so believed in helping all who wanted to fight for their freedom. General servile involvement in political and civil strife had now come into being[22]. This was also major as this led to many thinking that Spartacus was a figure who was surrounded by an aura of religiosity, and this is aided by the fact that he was known to be manipulating religious associations for the purpose of promoting resistance to slavery[23]. The aftermath of Spartacus death is significant in why he led a proletariat uprising in the first place leading on from the events of the servile wars. After the battle, the legionaries found and rescued 3,000 Roman prisoners in their camp all of whom were unharmed[24]. This is particularly significant as it shows how all the rebels wanted was freedom and change. This civilized treatment of the Roman prisoners contrasts starkly with the fate meted out to Spartacus followers. Crassus had 6,000 slaves crucified along the Appian Way between Capua and Rome a distance of about 200 kilometres. Their corpses lined the road all the way from Brundisium to Rome. Since Crassus never gave orders for the bodies to be taken down, for years after the final battle all who travelled that road were treated to this macabre spectacle[25]. This was significant as it sent a message, and heightened the sense that slavery was imperative to the economy and survival of roman rule and even more so the hierar chal system in operation, which led to a proletariat uprising. While the slave rebellions were intensified by the substantial volatility of the later Roman Republic, the slave wars and the Spartacus revolt significantly challenged the Roman Republic on a social and economic front. This was indefinitely aimed to increase the power of Rome, which would lead many modern historians arguing the fact that Spartacus revolt was an uprising against the brutal treatment of slaves throughout the roman world. In conclusion, the Spartacus rebellion was the last main slave revolts that Rome would face. This being quite possibly due to the fear which Crassus instilled with the crucifixions of all the rebels who were captured after the defeat of Spartacus[26]. The fear instilled on the roman hierarchy prompted by the three main slave wars would worry the Roman rule for the rest of its dominance, this because it seriously challenged the power and authority of the hierachy. Spartacus had defeated one Roman army after another, and it baffled many scholars how ordinary slaves had defeated legion after legion with ease. As Engels has written, where was the way out, salvation for the enslaved, oppressed, and impoverished, a way out common to all these groups of people (slaves, ex-slaves, the plebeian mob, impoverished free men) whose interests were mutually alien[27]. This is suggestive of the fact that the proletariat uprising was due to a common cause, which in fact it was, as the mass of Roman c itizenry became a mob of do-nothings more abject than the former poor whites in the southern country of the United States, and alongside of them developed a mode of production which was not capitalist but dependent upon slavery.[28] Finally, for Marx, Spartacus was revealed as the most splendid fellow in the whole of ancient history. Great general noble character, real representative of the ancient proletariat.[29] This finalises my argument, as I have argued that Spartacus, more so than the two servile wars instigated a lower class uprising due to his actions, and furthermore by Crassus murders of his followers, it showed how imperative slavery was to Rome. [1] Peter Green, THE FIRST SICILIAN SLAVE WAR, Past And Present, 20.1 (1961), pp. 10-29 . [2] Peter Green, THE FIRST SICILIAN SLAVE WAR, pp. 10-29. [3] Graham Stevenson, Spartacus And Class Struggle In Ancient Rome, [accessed 23 March 2017]. [4] Graham Stevenson, Spartacus And Class Struggle In Ancient Rome, [accessed 23 March 2017]. [5] Keith R Bradley, Slavery And Rebellion In The Roman World, 140 B.C. 70 B.C, 1st edn (Bloomington, Ind. [u.a.]: Indiana University Press, 1998), p.46. [6] Keith R Bradley, Slavery And Rebellion In The Roman World, p.47. [7] Peter Green, THE FIRST SICILIAN SLAVE WAR, pp. 10-29. [8] Peter Green, THE FIRST SICILIAN SLAVE WAR, pp. 10-29. [9] Peter Green, THE FIRST SICILIAN SLAVE WAR, pp. 10-29. [10] Graham Stevenson, Spartacus And Class Struggle In Ancient Rome, [accessed 23 March 2017]. [11] Graham Stevenson, Spartacus And Class Struggle In Ancient Rome, [accessed 23 March 2017]. [12] Communist Manifesto (Chapter 1), Marxists.Org, 2017 [accessed 23 March 2017]. [13] Keith R Bradley, Slavery And Rebellion In The Roman World, p.83 [14] Keith R Bradley, Slavery And Rebellion In The Roman World, p.83. [15] Keith R Bradley, Slavery And Rebellion In The Roman World, pp.83,84. [16] Keith R Bradley, Slavery And Rebellion In The Roman World, p.92. [17] Keith R Bradley, Slavery And Rebellion In The Roman World, p.98. [18] Keith R Bradley, Slavery And Rebellion In The Roman World, p.84. [19] Keith R Bradley, Slavery And Rebellion In The Roman World, p.85. [20] Keith R Bradley, Slavery And Rebellion In The Roman World, p.89. [21] Keith R Bradley, Slavery And Rebellion In The Roman World, p.93. [22] Keith R Bradley, Slavery And Rebellion In The Roman World, p.90. [23] Keith R Bradley, Slavery And Rebellion In The Roman World, p.93. [24] Alan Woods, Spartacus A Real Representative Of The Proletariat Of Ancient Times | Ancient History | History Theory, Marxist.Com, 2017 [accessed 23 March 2017]. [25] Alan Woods, Spartacus A Real Representative Of The Proletariat Of Ancient Times | Ancient History | History Theory, Marxist.Com, 2017 [accessed 23 March 2017]. [26] Alan Woods, Spartacus A Real Representative Of The Proletariat Of Ancient Times | Ancient History | History Theory, Marxist.Com, 2017 [accessed 23 March 2017]. [27] Graham Stevenson, Spartacus And Class Struggle In Ancient Rome, [accessed 23 March 2017]. [28] Graham Stevenson, Spartacus And Class Struggle In Ancient Rome, [accessed 23 March 2017]. [29] Graham Stevenson, Spartacus And Class Struggle In Ancient Rome, [accessed 23 March 2017].

Analysis of Hume’s Critique of Causation Essay -- Philosophy Philosoph

Analysis of Hume’s Critique of Causation Sometimes it is hard to be sure what conclusion to draw from a Humean analysis, and he is easy to misrepresent. This is partly because one argument he is engaged in may raise a number of related issues that he has dealt with elsewhere, and some of his points seem contradictory. My wish is to consider some of the possible readings of David Hume’s critique of causation, as it appears in Section VII of the Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, â€Å"On Necessary Connexion†, and their relation to the propositions of Section II, â€Å"Of the Origin of Ideas†, and Section X, â€Å"On Miracles†. I will offer criticisms and alternatives to Hume’s account(s) and conclude by picking which interpretation of Section VII best works for Hume, given certain arguments elsewhere in the Enquiry. The following is a summary of the aspects of the problem of induction as presented in the Enquiry which concern my discussion. Our assurance that certain sets of conditions are sufficient to produce certain effects is based on past experience that like has been conjoined with like. The belief in necessary connection entails (Hume will conclude that it amounts to) a belief that events similar to those experienced in the past will be accompanied by similar conjuncts. Such a belief may only be arrived at inductively, and induction does not discover necessity.1[1] This argument is against the supposed necessity of connection. â€Å"Necessity† here may refer to logical necessity, or it may not distinguish between this and physical necessity. To be physically necessary is to be sufficiently caused, but contingent upon the conditions of the event and the properties of all objects involved. Physical... ... but one about reason, that it is not this, but habit, which forms the basis of our beliefs. While it may be the case that denying an empirical fact may not result in a contradiction, Hume seems to be suggesting that it would still be irrational to do so. That abstracting from events to laws is a rational, though inductive, act seems hard to deny. Thus, at best, Hume can only show that it is experience which first provides the matter for reason. Sources Hume, David. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1977) 1[1] David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1977), p.46 2[2] p.51 3[3] p.49 4[4] I think both Descartes and Kant had perfectly good a priori demonstrations of the existence of the self, which is all one needs to reach the concept of existence. 5[5] p.42

Mesopotamia Case Essay

HISTORY OF MESOPOTAMIAN RELIGION The name Mesopotamia, is a Greek name which means ‘the land between the rivers’, refers to the geographic region which lies near the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers and not to any particular civilization. The land of Mesopotamia is made fertile by the irregular and often violent flooding of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. While these floods aided agricultural endeavors by adding rich silt to the soil every year, it took a tremendous amount of human labor to successfully irrigate the land and to protect the young plants from the surging flood waters. Given the combination of fertile soil and the need for organized human labor, perhaps it is not surprising that the first civilization developed in Mesopotamia. Sumerians were the first settlers in Sumeria. By c.3500 BCE, the Sumerians had developed many of the features that characterized subsequent civilizations. Cuneiform was a system of writing established by the Sumerians which became the dominant system of writing in Mesopotamia for over 2000 years. Mesopotamia is widely recognized as one of the regions in the Near East first experiencing the developmental transition to hydraulic and urban civilization, duly celebrated as a â€Å"cradle of civilization† and the eastern segment of the Fertile Crescent. Mesopotamian religion is the religious beliefs and practices of the Sumerians and Akkadians, which were noted the first developed civilizations and religions; and later of their successors, the Babylonians and Assyrians. (Lindemans, 2007). In general terms, it constitutes the greater part of what is now Iraq, eastern Syria, and south-eastern Turkey. The deities of Sumer were usually associated with aspects of nature, such as fertility of the fields and livestock. Among the most important of the many Mesopatamian gods were Anu, the god of heaven; Enki the god of water; and Enlil, the earth god. Deities were often associated with particular cities. Astral deities such as Shamash and Sin were also worshipped. The Mesopatamians are skilled astrologers who studied the movements of heavenly bodies. Priests also determined the will of the gods through the observation of omens, especially by reading the entrails of sacrificed animals. The king functioned as the chief priest, presiding at the new-year festival held in spring, when the kingship is renewed and the triumph of the deity over the powers of chaos was celebrated. In Mesopotamia, each city state had its own god who owned it, and although other gods were admitted, they were always subordinate to the city god. Everyone had to belong to a temple, whatever rank they had in society. If they belonged to the temple of Marduk, they considered themselves ‘the people of the God Marduk’. The god was the lord and the people served him as slaves or at least as servants. Part of everyone’s produce belonged to the god and had to be brought as a sacrifice. The land itself belonged to the god and had to be leased from him. God have never been any good at signing agreements so the contracts were signed on his behalf by the priests. The main festival in Mesopotamia was the New Year Festival held in spring or in autumn. Its significance was the renewal of the land through the sprouting of new buds or the end of the summer scorching. The Sumerian drama focused on Dumuzi or Tammuz, the creative power of Spring while the Goddess was Inanna, the fertility of nature. The drama went this way: the earth goddess conceived a handsome son who later became her lover and begat the next son – a ritual performed by the king and his consort or the head priest and priestess in a ritual coupling. The son died and everyone wailed but the new son was born and everyone rejoiced. In the tropics the vegetation died in the summer heat but in northern climates it died with the onset of frost, so the times were not necessarily the same. (Amytas, 2002) In an article of Sumerian Religion it was said that reincarnation is a concept suitable for Mesopotamians because it was so real and explicit that it was not worth reporting the striking obvious. The Mesopotamians, took painstaking notes of the coming of the sunrise and sunset every day, the return of the seasons, the planets and the stars, always revolving and returning to chartered points in the skies. Thus, they did believe that everything was cyclic, and probably considered life and death as such as well (cited in Adapa). MESOPOTAMIAN MYTHOLOGY The two following stories are one of the descent and ascent stories of Mesopotamian Religion (Amytas, 2002) Descents to the underworld are a constant theme in Mesopotamia and tell about the triumph of the spirit over desire, wrong doings or guilt. Descent stories always contain the warning that one should not venture to ‘the Land of No Return’, that the laws of ‘Great Below’ cannot be changed and it designs the foremost. Nevertheless, Inanna descended to meet Her other Self, the Great Judge and Queen of the Underworld, Ereshkigal, and She who is the Lover and Beloved resurfaced as the vision of triumphant humanity that transcends all deaths. Enlil descended after having raped Ninlil, who immediately took matters in her hands and went down after Him to conquer Her beloved back, achieving major growth along the process herself from maiden to Consort of Lord Air. Even Enlil, the most important of the young Anunnaki gods, had to undergo punishment for a terrible act in the most romantic and intense of all descent stories. However, Ninlil, as the Beloved and Hardest Judge Enlil could have ever had, flew after him for the rescue to bring him back to the Heights Above, to become Enlil’s partner in all levels. All of them faced awesome trials and returned back to the Heights after achieving much healing and growth. It is therefore clear that returns from the Underworld, despite all warnings against venturing over there, can be achieved, but only by the triumph of the spirit, by conquering one’s own weaknesses, by a necessary loss to achieve a major growth. In the myth of Adapa, Adap ascends to the Heavens to meet Anu so that he could justify himself in front of the Skyfather for having been disrespectful to the South Wind. Adapa is the proto-Solomon, the sage and the priest-king of Eridu. He refuses immortality to come back to the Middleworld instead of remaining with the Great Gods in the Great Above, as Anu had given him the opportunity to stay there by eating and drinking from the table of the gods. Adapa refuses the offering, because Enki, Adapa’s personal god, had warned him not to, if Adapa did not want to die. A possible experience for this passage is the following: in the end Adapa understood that he would have eventually eternal life after living a full life in the physical world, and not in the moment he had been offered the gift by Anu. He did not need eternal life when he was offered it by Anu, because he was needed on earth, he was the priest-king the foundation of the state which was being built in Eridu, the place where kingship descended from the heavens. Again, it is a Mesopatamian ascent story with a return, whose mystery show the cycle and the link between heaven and earth, the Great Above and the Great Below not as opposite worlds, but matching complements, in a never-ending cycle. PHOENICIAN LETTERS (Amytas, 2007) The Phoenician Letters is a piece of mystery teachings in a written form from a master to a devoted acolyte in the Mesopotamian tradition, a sort of retro-Caballa. It involves 10 letters, each involving a god/goddess (Rimon-Adad, Nabu, Ishtar, Nergal, Shamash, Marduk, Anu, Enlil, Ea-Enki, Sin-Nana) by the master to the acolyte exchanged during the period of two years. The letters cover the training of a future-priest king by a master kept unknown up to the last letter. The quotations on the chapter of Nergal on the next paragraph are about reincarnation, the Eternal Return. Notice that the piece of metal that is left from the burning of what should be burnt may refer to that part of matter in us that is primeval and without blemish, the seed of the Great Mother that they all carry within, represented by the metal attributions of Mesopotamians deities, or the imperishable in them, their Personal Gods. On Ishtar, â€Å"But Ishtar is all this and more. She is the reborn†¦Know, o Prince, that death is the source of life, life is the cause of death. Dumuzi her lover must die in order to live. She is the rhythm, and all rhythms have an end, this is death, all have a beginning (pages 34-35).   On Nergal: â€Å"There are many forms of heroism. There is that form that represents a magnificent stupidity, where the hero achieves nothing, saving neither his people nor his own life, but taking with him down into death as many of the enemy as possible. He will fight in the underworld that battle which he did not win, for it is sad that as a man dies, all that he has done is presented to him, to see if he regrets his actions or not. If he regrets and pines for the things that he failed to do or the errors he has made, then this is a weight he must carry into his next time of living (Lishtar’s emphasis). Herein is the tale of justice: the assessors of hell visit upon each man his crimes, and according as he loves them or hates them, he will be attracted to the same events, time without end, till the actions of his life be without blemish† (page 41). CREATION OF MAN (and WOMAN) SUMERIAN VERSION Enki, the Magician, and Ninhursag, the Earth Mother, create humankind from the fertile waters of the Abzu and a pinch of clay, breathing into the mix the spirit of a slain god. It is in the myth that the spirit of the slain god resonates in each and every being as a drumbeat, life force, to remind them of its sacrifice. According to Amytas, the myth was a wondrous metaphor that shows incarnation as a gift from Divine Consciousness bestowed upon all humankind, all that lives and breathes. The bond that was thus established between heaven and earth from the beginning of Sumerian religion, whereby from this moment on humankind is called upon to continue for the gods the workings of existence and faithful servants. This metaphor shows the truth all initiates have experiences from times immemorial. Spirit can only incarnate through love, the same way we can only ascend to the heights of religious and visionary experience by giving spiritual body to our soul’s design. Slain in this context may very well mean the necessary loss to achieve higher consciousness, the disrobing and vulnerability needed to enter both Great Above and the Depths Below enforced. Furthermore, the myth of the ‘Creation of Man and Woman’ can be interpreted according to the Sumerians as the never-ending miracle of spirit entering matter and for those of them who live their lives in the light of the Mesopotamian tradition. From the beginning of Sumerian Religion, from the creation of man and woman it is therefore present the everlasting bond between matter and spirit. As concluded by Amytas,† the part of us who belongs to the everlasting spirit will be then confronted by our life achievements and judged by the Annunaki of the Underworld. These deities will be the judges of our souls and decide when we are ready to return from the ‘Land of No Return’. It is for all these reasons that we suggest that the Eternal Return might have been a core understated principle of Mesopotamian religion.† THE BABYLON AND ITS PEOPLE Many scholars believe the first great historian, Herodotus, a Greek who traveled widely over the ancient world several centuries before the birth of Chris, visited the city of Babylon in its decline. He has left a description of the city but, because he could not speak Babylonian, his remarkable statements must come largely from the lips of the guides. The harvest was, Herodotus says, twice or thrice as bountiful as in other lands, the ears of wheat and barley growing to a phenomenal size. Rich groves of palm trees waved in the breeze all over the plain and so expert were the food growers that from the fruit of the palm they got bread, wine and honey. From their scattered villages they looked with pride toward Babel – the Greeks called it Babylon – or the gate of the God. They had no physician. Marriage, he says, was by purchase or auction sale. His most famous statement about the morals of ancient Babylon is to the effect that every woman had once in her life to prostitute herself in what Herodotus calls ‘the court of Venus’, meaning the court of the temple of the goddess Ishtar. There she was compelled to stand until some man threw her a coin, saying, â€Å"the goddess Mylitta prosper thee,† and taking her away to his couch. (Shirlie) On the contrary, in regard to its morals and its women he totally misunderstood his informants. There was no auction of wives in Babylon, and there was no such law as the prostitution of every woman at the temple of Ishtar. By that time, Ishtar was a patroness of virtue and the chief refuge of sinners. Women had in ancient Babylon a position of respect and prestige scarcely lower than they have won in modern times and the law of sexual purity was most drastically enforced upon both sexes. The Babylonian code of laws was compiled by King Hammurabi. This code was found carved on a black diorite column seven feet high in the ruins of Susa in 1901. A conqueror of Babylon about 1100 BC had stolen it and carried it off to the hills. On the upper part of it is a figure of Hammurabi in an attitude of worship before the sun-god, Shamash. The king says he made the code himself. Babylon, supposed to have been a sink of iniquity, in which chastity was unknown, an example followed the clauses of the next paragraph in the Hammurabi Code of four thousand years ago. MESOPOTAMIAN CONCEPTS OF DISEASE AND HEALING Mesopotamian diseases are often blamed on pre-existing spirits: gods, ghosts, etc. Each spirit corresponds or is responsible for a specific disease. For example, ‘Hand of God X’, of the stomach corresponds to what is called a disease of stomach. A number of diseases simply were identified by names, ‘bennu’ for example. Also it was recognized that various organs could simply malfunction causing illnesses. Mesopotamian uses plants as treatment for diseases although this cannot be relative for magical purposes. In addition, specific offerings are made to a particular god or ghost when it was considered to be a causative factor, but these offerings are not indicated in the medical texts, and must have been found in other texts. There two distinct types of professional medical practitioners in Mesopotamia, the ashipu known as the ‘sorcerer’ and the asu which may be referred to as the ‘physician’. The ashipu diagnoses the ailment. In the case of internal diseases, this most often meant that the ashipu determined which god or demon was causing the illness. The ashipu also attempted to determine if the disease was the result of some error or sin on the part of the patient. The phrase, â€Å"the Hand of†¦Ã¢â‚¬  was used to indicate the divine entity responsible for the ailment in question, who could then be propitiated by the patient. The ashipu could also attempt to cure the patient by means of charms and spells that were designed to entice away or drive out the spirit causing the disease. On the other hand, asu is the specialist in herbal remedies and deals with were often classifiable as empirical applications of medication. For example, when treating wounds the asu relied on three fundamental techniques: washing, bandaging and making plasters on which appear in the world’s oldest known medical document (c. 2100 BCE). CONCLUSION Mesopotamian religion in accordance with my research clearly implies that it is the foundation of many religions since, Sargon, who founded the Babylon and created the first Mesopotamian empire, lived over two thousand years before Christ and even a thousand years before the presumed time of Moses of the Christian bible. One example would be the comparison in the story of Moses: one of the clay tablets covered with the cuneiform writing of the Babylonians and Assyrians refers to Sargon, the great king. His mother bore him in secret. After the birth she made a little ark or boat of reeds or rushes, coated it with pitch, which is natural there. She placed the baby in it and she set it afloat on the river, doubtless expecting it to die but hoping it might be saved. The child was destined to be a mighty leader and the gods took care of him. A water-carrier found the ark and reared the child, until the goddess Ishtar saw and fell in love with the youth, and made him king over the land. To sum it all up, learning man’s history always is a very interesting subject, it’s like being transported to a different world where oneself could be alienated. For me it would not matter because the most important thing is that you have respect to all men regardless of their religion. Bibliography Williams, Tyler. Ideas of Origins and Creation in Ancient Mesopatamia. 2007 Lindemans, M.F. Mesopotamian Mythology. 2007 Amytas, Voluptua. Sumerian Religion and the Eternal Return. 2002 Shirlie. God or Goddess? The Son Gods. 1999 http://www.oriental.cam.ac.uk/jmc http://www.archaeowiki.org/Mesopotamia

Family definition Essay

When most people think of the word family, mother, father, children, and relatives immediately come to mind. If you look up the word in the Oxford English dictionary you would read: fam ·i ·ly (fÄÆ'm’ə-lÄ“, fÄÆ'm’lÄ“) n. – the group of persons consisting of the parents and their children, whether actually living together or not; in wider sense, the unity formed by those who are nearly connected by blood or affinity. While all this can be true of a family, it is not the only or the correct way that family can be defined. Family is more accurately described as a group of people who might not be related by blood or marriage but who sincerely care and love each other. They are there for you every step of the way and provide support you could never get anywhere else. Since the beginning, families have been the building blocks of any society. Almost every aspect of our lives involves the term family. In our religion we are part of a â€Å"family† of believers. At Penn State we are part of one big â€Å"family† of students and faculty. One person unites our country as a â€Å"family† whom we all look towards for guidance. While these examples might be accepted by society today, it only describes family in broad terms. Family love is much deeper than all of that and is the love you share with your friends and relatives. One very common misconception about family, as seen in the Oxford definition, is that its members almost always have to be related by blood, marriage, or adoption. In truth, family is anyone you love and care about and who also feels the same way about you. German poet Johann Schiller described family perfectly when he said; â€Å"It is not flesh and blood but the heart which makes us fathers and sons.† I believe that my family is not only my parents, my little brother and my other relatives, but also my best friends. My great-aunt is my blood relative but she knows as much about me as the next person. For example, my friend Caitlin can tell you anything you would ever want to know concerning me and we can practically read each other’s mind. I am not saying that my great-aunt is not considered part of my family but Caitlin is just as much as my aunt. Family goes hand-in-hand with friendship. In order to have a family you need friendship. My family and I do not get along just because we are forced to live together. My family are my best friends and we get along because we genuinely love each other and want to be with each other. Every family is going to have its problems, but in the end no one can deny the love they have for each other. In today’s society most people consider family to be just blood relations but in reality family is made of the bonds you share with those you care for the most. Family is a completely necessary component of anyone’s life. Your family helps you through the tough times. They provide the needed support to get you through life. Family cares about what happens to you, are always there for you, and above all, they love you no matter what.