Culture and Human Psychology
On March 11, 2011, Japan suffered its most powerful earthquake to date, tipping the Richter scale at 9.0. Shortly thereafter, a massive tsunami washed away towns. In the midst of this natural disaster, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station began to have partial meltdowns. There were leaks and explosions of radioactive gas, and another reactor caught fire. It looked like this would be the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl. (?Japan?Earthquake, Tsunami and Nuclear Crisis?, 2011) How did the people from Japan respond to these devastating disasters? How did other countries respond to Japan? Now, consider if the location was different. There are nuclear power plants located throughout the world. Some of the largest ones are in Canada, France, and Ukraine. Do you think the responses from these countries would have all been the same as Japan?s?
Individuals behave in ways that reflect the collective culture in which they live. Culture can be defined as an adaptation to the environment that promotes survival. Several factors are assumed to influence culture:
? Ecological (e.g., geography, climate, and natural resources)
? Social (e.g., density of population, money, government, history, and religion)
? Biological (e.g., temperament, and personality of the population)
In your definition of culture, you might consider the aforementioned factors and the way they influence the behavior of individuals within a specific culture.
For this assignment, select three different cultures. Consider how culture influences human psychology, behavior, and thought processes.
With these thoughts in mind:
? Describe your definition of culture. Explain two ways culture influences human psychology. Then describe a specific example of human behavior (e.g., aggression, gender-specific behaviors, or mental health) and explain one way this behavior may be exhibited differently among the three cultures you selected. Support your responses using the with current literature.

Topic: Animal Spirits - How Human Psychology Drives the Economy - The Theory of Behavioral Economics

Particularly use work of authors like Robert Shiller (and Akerlof) at Yale and Richard Thaler at Chicago. Shiller has a whole course on the web.

The semester paper should be prepared according to the following guidelines

TOPIC: select at least two major thinkers (like Freud, Skinner, May, Gilligan) and/or schools of thought (like behaviorism, psychoanalysis, cognitive psychology or phenomenological psychology) and compare and contrast them in terms of their ?psychological anthropology.? Describe this you will need to draw on the readings and presentations of the semester to address such questions as

? What does this school or thinker consider the proper subject matter of psychology to be? What does this thinker or theory make its focus and, conversely, what does it leave to the margins or ignore?

? What are the themes or ideas thought to be central to understanding what this thinker or school considers to be the proper content of psychology? What are the major features of this thinker?s or school of thought?s theory?

? Does this theory or model arise in the context of or as a response to some other model of psychology?

? How does this theory or thinker conceive of a human being? What must be understood in their system if human psychology is to be understood?

SOURCES: While your primary sources will be the readings from the syllabus, you can and probably should draw on secondary sources. Such sources might include textbooks in advanced branches of psychology (personality psychology, abnormal psychology).Texts:

Freud, S. (1960). The ego and the id. (J. Riviere, Trans. J. Strachey, Ed.) New
York: W. W. Norton. Originally published 1923.

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women?s development. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.

May, R. (1967). Psychology and the human dilemma. Princeton, NJ: Van
Nostrand.

Keen, E. (1982).A primer in phenomenological psychology. Washington , D.C.: University Press of
America.

Additional Required Readings:

Bandura, A. Ross, D. and Ross, S. A. (1983). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive
models. In W. Damon (Ed.), Social and personality development: Essays on the growth of the
child (pp. 139-152). New York: Norton. Originally published 1961.

Hornstein, G. A. (1988). Quantifying psychological phenomena: Debates dilemmas, and
implications. In J. Morawski (Ed.), The rise of experimental psychology (pp.1-34). New Haven: Yale University Press.

Kohlberg, L. (1983). He development of Children?s orientation toward a moral order: Sequence in
development of moral thought. In W. Damon (Ed.), Social and personality development: Essays on the growth of the child (pp. 388-404). New York: Norton. Originally published 1963.

May, R. (1958). The origin and significance of the existential movement in psychology. R . May, E. Angel ,
and H. F. Ellenberger, (Eds.), Existence: A new dimension in psychiatry and psychology (pp. 3-36). New York: Basic Books.

May, R. (1958). Contributions of existential psychotherapy. In R . May, E. Angel , and H. F. Ellenberger,
(Eds.), Existence: A new dimension in psychiatry and psychology (pp. 37-91). New York: Basic Books.

Schwartz, S. (1986). Memory. In Classic studies in psychology (pp.58-73). Palo Alto CA: Mayfield.

Skinner, B. F. (1971). Freedom. In Beyond freedom and dignity. New York: Bantam Books.

Skinner, B. F. (1971). Dignity. In Beyond freedom and dignity. New York: Bantam Books.

Schwartz, S. (1986). John Watson/ Little Albert. In Classic studies in psychology (pp.25-30). Palo Alto CA:
Mayfield.


PURPOSE: The purpose of this assignment is to allow the student to expand upon the learning of the semester by developing a systematic exposition of the understanding of it s human subject matter implicit in at least two views of the discipline presented during the semester. This will afford the student the opportunity to become familiar with and develop a personal understanding of paradigms in the field that most reflects each student?s personal interest.

FORMAT: Psychology majors and others familiar with APA format should use it. (Many of the basics are available on the web, enter ?APA format? in your search engine.) Others: systematic margins (no longer that 1.25?), double spaced, organized system of headings and complete citation of works cited (along with page numbers for direct quotes), reference page(s), font size no larger than 12 points. The organization of the headings of your paper should reflect the thought and care you put into planning this work. The paper should be at least 8-10 pages long (the body of the paper, not including title page, references, special dedication to you parents or current ?significant other? or whatever else you put in) and reflect the care, preparation, thoughtfulness and thoroughness appropriate to an assignment weighted so heavily (18%) in your final grade.

This paper is due absolutely no later than Th 5/8.

TITLE: Are Carl Rogers' Core Conditions Really Sufficient for Therapy? Discuss With Reference to Research Based Evidence.

Bona fide Psychological sources only please e.g. Carl Rogers' original works, or genuine (and preferably recent)research papers from reputable psychology journals.

Essential sources:

On Becoming a Person- Carl Rogers. Constable

Client-Centred Therapy- Carl Rogers. Constable

Structure:
Briefly describe Rogers theory of the core conditions and how it fits in with his view of human psychology with close reference to his original work.
Describe and discuss the controversy surrounding Rogers' assertion that the core conditions are necessary and sufficient with refernce to research evidence for and against. Examine the research on empathy.
Critically evaluate the research evidence i.e. examine its' methodological validity, its' biases if any and its' findings.
Examine the findings of many researchers that, though the core conditions may not be sufficient in themselves there is strong evidence to suggest that the relationship between therapist and client is of primary importance to therapy outcome.
Summarise.



On Personal Power- Carl Rogers. Constable

the Necessary and Sufficient Conditions of Therapeutic Personality Change- Carl Rogers. Journal of Consulting Psychology, Vol. 21 No. 2 1957, pp 95-103

Handbook of Individual Therapy 4th ed. - Dryden (Ed). Sage

Empathy Reconcidered- Bohart and Greenberg (Eds). American Psychological Association

Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change 4th ed.- Bergin & Garfield (Eds). Wiley

The Specificity Myth: The Fallacious Premise of Mental Health Treatment. Paper presented to the American Psychological Association (2000) available at: http://www.personcentred.com/specificity.htm

Other suggested sources:
Person-Centred Therapy in Focus- Wilkins. Sage

Person-Centred Counselling in action 2nd ed.- Mearns & Thorne. Sage

Please follow the same format as the following paper does.
Instruction: ERIK ERIKSON ? Describe the development of the personality (with special emphasis on the strength of the ego, and the conflicts that are resolved during development). Make sure you describe the development of the personality in terms of the stages up to the point the personality is in the fictional work you?ve chosen (remember the virtues if they are developed).IT IS IMPORTANT TO ANALYZE LANDON CARTER'S BEHAVIOR THROUGH EKRIKSON'S STAGES. (please be specific like this paper does).
Even if the film only shows you few stages, I am guessing that you can probably get some hints about the earlier stages. Obviously, anyone who chooses Erikson is going to be limited by the age of the character, and any speculations about where development might go from there would have to be based on understanding where the character is at the end of the film. In terms of the strong ego, you need to think about how (previous to the end of the film), Landon resolved the various 'crises' that confronted him prior to that as a way of thinking about the ego.

Example paper:
In the late 19th century, Dr. Sigmund Freud, an Austrian physician, combined medicine, philosophy and his theories concerning the inner workings of human beings to formulate a theory of human psychology (Frager and Fadiman 19). With a focus on introspection and clinical observations, Freud developed a system of psychotherapy called psychoanalysis to unlock the unresolved conflicts of the human mind and to heal psychopathologies and dissipate mental anguish. Freud based his theory on the existence of inner conflicts within the human personality that result from the competing drives for physical gratification and moral action that humans develop. He also proposed a psychosexual theory of personality development, whereby libidinal ?life sustaining? energy transfers from different erogenous zones throughout the stages of development in childhood that can become fixated in these areas provided a trauma occurs during one of these stages. Finally, he delved into the various levels of human consciousness, outlining defense mechanisms utilized by individuals to cope with traumas and illicit thoughts and desires, all of which evoke anxiety (Frager and Fadiman 20-1).
Dr. Gregory House, the lead in FOX?s hit medical drama, ?HOUSE M.D.?, is a brilliant doctor with a scorn for humanity, a biting wit and a traumatic past. He developed an addiction to Vicodin, a painkiller, after his leg suffered an infarction (muscle death), leaving him with a limp and chronic pain. Dr. Wilson, one of House?s few personal friends, said of House?s contempt for one of his patients, a psychiatrist: ?Never before has a profession been so decried, by someone who needed it so badly? (Episode 411). It is for this reason that House is a prime candidate for analysis under Freud?s psychodynamic theory. As is evident throughout the episodes of ?HOUSE M.D.?, House is what Freud would deem a classic oral aggressive character, devoid of a fully developed superego, with powerful Thanatos urges, who lives his life primarily through the defense mechanisms of isolation and displacement.

DR. HOUSE?S BIOGRAPHY
Dr. Gregory House is a misanthropic, world-renowned diagnostician at the fictitious Princeton Plainsboro Hospital in New Jersey. In every episode, his medical brilliance and gifted perceptiveness are put to the test to solve the mystery of his patient?s illness, all the while flexing his acerbic wit and relaying to his team of doctors and his patients his philosophy about the truths of reality and the baseness of human nature. He lives his life by the motto: ?Everybody lies,? (Episode 101) and his distrust for other human beings is so extensive that he avoids actually meeting with his patients if he can help it, preferring instead to stay in his office and rely on written patient histories and test results, brought to him by his team of three fellows. ?I don?t ask why patients lie; I just assume they all do,? House has said (Episode 107). When he is missing a critical detail about a patient history, or if a patient, family member, or proxy is standing in the way of his diagnosis, he typically brow-beats them with his unrelenting dispassionate rationality and brutal honesty, manipulates whoever stands in his way, violates medical ethics, breaks into patients? homes and employs whatever methods necessary, no matter how morally dubious, to solve the case and reach the correct diagnosis, but more importantly to satisfy his curiosity. He is fascinated by the puzzle of the diagnosis and is said to have the ?Rubik?s Cube complex?, by Dr. Wilson (Episode 109). His excessive disregard for authority, non-compliance with social conventions and selfish, anti-social behavior frequently alienates his team, his colleagues, and his boss.
Gregory House was born to a loving mother, Blythe, and a marine pilot, John, who was frequently transferred with his family to bases around the world throughout Greg?s upbringing. Greg claims to love his mother who loves him as he is, but he hates his father because of his military-styled insistence on adhering to strict rules as well as his ?insane moral compass that won't let you lie to anybody about anything. It's a great quality for boy scouts and police witnesses. Crappy quality for a dad? (Episode 205). House admits that his father subjected him to physical abuse throughout his childhood.
House was a very curious and bright boy, as can be inferred by his allusions to his fascination with archaeology and science. In Greg?s early adolescence, his family was stationed in Japan, where he was first inspired to become a doctor after watching a Japanese untouchable (buraku) doctor gain tremendous respect, despite his otherwise untouchable status, by saving House?s schoolmate whom none of the other Japanese doctors could cure.
House attended Johns Hopkins University for both his undergraduate degree as well as medical school until he was expelled for cheating, whereby he subsequently resumed and completed medical school at the University of Michigan. He is a board certified diagnostician with specialties in nephrology and infectious disease.
House was in a serious relationship with the hospital lawyer, Stacy Warner, for a number of years until he suffered the infarction in his leg. Because the diagnosis for his condition was not caught in time, the likely course of treatment would have been to amputate his leg. House, however, insisted that he receive a radical and potentially fatal treatment in order to salvage his leg. When he was unconscious, Stacy, his medical proxy, chose the safer middle ground, which was to remove the dead muscle cells in his leg, leaving him a cripple with a cane and chronic pain for the rest of his life; although less pain than House?s preferred treatment would have yielded. House never forgave Stacy for this betrayal, even though her decision likely saved his life, and they subsequently ended their relationship. House then developed an addiction to Vicodin, the painkiller prescribed to him to relieve his pain, although other characters in the show eventually come to realize that he uses it to escape psychological pain such as anxiety as well.
FREUD?S THEORY
In Freud?s psychodynamic theory, he differentiated between the conscious, the preconscious, and the unconscious. According to Freud, the conscious is what one?s mind is immediately aware of, whereas the preconscious is information that is readily available to be recalled if one so chooses, such as one?s phone number. The unconscious, however, consists of repressed thoughts (thoughts inaccessible to the conscious), impulses (e.g., sex and aggression) that motivate behavior, traumatic events, and thoughts and wishes that are unacceptable under society?s standards. Impulses have a source, an aim, an impetus, and an object that the impulse acts upon (Frager and Fadiman 21).
The unconscious is dominated by what Freud termed, the id, or the biological aspects of the human personality, which encompasses our animal drives for sex and aggression. It is governed by the pleasure principle, seeking to maximize pleasure and minimize pain. The superego, on the other hand, encompasses our conscience (i.e., our internalized system of right and wrong) that we develop from being punished, self-observation, and the ego ideal, or the moral values we identify with in which we receive positive reactions that reinforces pro-social behavior. The ego, the weakest of the three aspects of personality, through both conscious and unconscious means, seeks to mediate the inner conflict between the ever-clashing id and superego. The ego works within the parameters of one?s internal values provided by the superego as well as societal consequences to gratify the id in a morally and socially acceptable manner. (Frager and Fadiman 23-4)
Freud believed that the development of the human personality took place in a series of psychosexual stages that occur early in life. According to Freud, the first stage of psychosexual development is the oral stage, which occurs from birth until 18 months, whereby the infant is solely governed by its id. During this stage, libidinal, or life sustaining, energy is focused around the mouth, which is the infant?s primary means of physical gratification. The infant takes great pleasure from oral stimulation, such as feeding, sucking and tasting, and by relieving its libidinal tension through oral means. The baby?s primary interaction comes from its mouth and is very dependent on its mother?s breast for sustenance. It is because of this dependence that either the baby will develop a sense of trust and comfort with its mother and the world at large, or if it is not sufficiently gratified, it will develop distrust and possibly an oral fixation later in life. If the baby is overly nourished and overly stimulated around the mouth, the libidinal energy around the mouth may become cathected or invested in the mouth, meaning, it may develop an oral fixation later in life, whereby it will exhibit appetitive and dependent behaviors. If the baby, however, is not adequately nourished and orally stimulated, it can become fixated in the oral stage and develop into an oral aggressive (oral-sadistic) character. (Frager and Fadiman 25-6)
Oral aggression manifests itself in verbal aggression, argumentativeness, sarcasm, manipulative tendencies, and oral habits such as eating, drinking, and other habits related to mouthing and ingestion and the oral aggressive personality is constituted as a ?biting? and caustic personality.
ORAL FIXATION
House is a classic oral aggressive character. It can be surmised from the dynamic of House?s parents, that although his mother loved him unconditionally, his authoritarian father probably insisted that House?s mother not coddle him, which therefore left House insufficiently nourished. The father may even have even convinced House?s mother to prematurely wean their son. This is likely to have led House to develop an oral-aggressive fixation in his later life, which explains his sarcastic, manipulative, and argumentative nature. Dr. House has been described as biting, caustic, and sarcastic by his colleague and best friend, Dr. Wilson, which are the primary characteristics of an oral aggressive character. Throughout every episode, House regularly insults his team, his colleagues, his boss and even his patients with his sarcasm and biting wit. In fact, most of House?s lines in the series are sarcastic quips. A few examples of his innumerous instances of oral aggression includes the following: When House was in the free clinic facing a patient whose body turned orange he said:
?Unfortunately, you have a deeper problem (than being orange). Your wife is having an affair. You?re orange you moron! It?s one thing for you not to notice, but if your wife hasn?t picked up on the fact that her husband has changed color, then she?s just not paying attention. By the way, do you just consume a ridiculous amount of carrots and mega dose vitamins? Carrots turn you yellow, the vitamins turn you red. Find some finger paint and do the math? (Episode 101).
In addition, when a mother expressed concern over giving her 10-year-old child his inhaler for his asthma, because of the strength of the medication, House responded:
?Your doctor probably was concerned about the strength of your medicine too. He probably weighed that danger against the danger of not breathing. Oxygen is so important during those pre-pubescent years don?t you think?? (Episode 101)
In addition, in every episode, House pops an inordinate amount of Vicodin pills into his mouth, especially when he is mentally anguished, which can be attributed to his oral fixation. To prove this last point, in an attempt to get out of his free-clinic obligations that are uninteresting to him because of the banality of the illnesses, he addressed the free-clinic waiting room: ??But not to worry, because for most of you, this job could be done by a monkey with a bottle of Motrin. Speaking of which, if you're particularly annoying, you may see me reach for this: this is Vicodin. It's mine! You can't have any! And no, I do not have a pain management problem, I have a pain problem ... but who knows? Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm too stoned to tell. So, who wants me? " (Episode 103). House is also seen drinking excessive amounts of alcohol both in his apartment, the hospital (Episode 201), and in a bar, which is also characteristic of an oral fixation.
In keeping with the oral aggressive personality, House is exceedingly manipulative. He frequently manipulates his patients and their loved ones into complying with every course of treatment he wants, no matter how risky and dangerous the treatment may be or how inconclusive his diagnosis is.
Stacy to & about House: "Such a hero. Always righting wrongs. Who cares who you have to manipulate." (Episode 208)
In addition, House has been known to manipulate office politics to achieve his ends. For example, in the 4th season, House was forced to hire a new team of diagnostic fellows after his first team left en masse. When Dr. Cuddy hired Dr. Foreman, a member of House?s original team back, she only allowed House to pick two additional members from the prospective recruits when House wanted to hire three. House then feigned indecision over whom to pick from his final three candidates, two males and a female, and he asked Dr. Cuddy for her advice. Although she wanted him to pick a male and a female for politically correct reasons, she told him to hire the two male candidates, thinking that upon listening to her advice, he would then defy it and pick a male and a female candidate. House, of course, anticipated all of this, he picked the two male candidates in mock-accordance with Cuddy?s endorsement, and she was forced to let him hire the female candidate as well.
THE PHALLIC STAGE
Freud further advanced that humans undergo the phallic stage of psychosexual development between the ages of 4 and 6 years old. During this time, libidinal energy focuses around the genitals of the child, and the child begins to develop sexual feelings for the opposite-sex parent. Boys see their fathers as competition and feel what Freud termed, castration anxiety, namely that the father will harm the boy if he learns of the child?s illicit feelings for his mother. Seeing that he cannot compete with the father to obtain the mother, the boy undergoes a process of identification with the father, whereby he adopts the father?s values and morality in order to vicariously obtain the mother. It is thus during this phase of development that the child develops a superego. (Frager and Fadiman 26)
In the episode ?One Day, One Room?, House mentioned that he had been physically abused by his father throughout his childhood. It can be surmised that House had been sufficiently abused by his father during this critical stage in his psychosexual development (the phallic stage) for it to have profoundly interfered with his formation of a healthy superego. The abuse House experienced may have been a form of castration, which interfered with his process of identification with his father?s superego, resulting in his superego being malformed. Furthermore, it is evident that because of his hatred for his father, House has negatively identified with his father, both in terms of moral values as well as in various other aspects of his life. For example, while his father is extremely structured and punctual (Episode 504) even to such things as insignificant as family dinner, House is impulsive and tardy, making it a point to come to work and to all of his appointments late. In addition, his father as a military man cared deeply about his appearance, while House, on the other hand, retains permanent stubble, rarely brushes his hair, refuses to wear a doctor?s white lab coat and instead sometimes wears jeans and t-shirt to work.
More significantly, House does not live by a conventional code of morality like the one his father did. House regularly demonstrates a lack of empathy for human suffering, sick people, and even his few close relationships such as Dr. Wilson and Dr. Cuddy that astonishes the other characters in the show. He treats everyone with disrespect, insulting and manipulating everyone just to amuse himself. He even fails to admire noble virtues and acts of kindness or bravery in an impossible situation. For example, in season 2, House had a 9-year-old female cancer patient who came down with a mysterious illness that would have lessened her already short prognosis of one year to live. While her bravery in the face of her difficult situation and her selfless care for her mother?s well-being inspired House?s team, Dr. Wilson, and Dr. Cuddy, House marginalized her admirable attributes as symptoms and statistics: ?These cancer kids, you can't put them all on a pedestal. It's basic statistics. Some of them have gotta be whiney little fraidy-cats? (Episode 202) and
Dr. Gregory House: [talking about 9-year-old cancer patient] She's such a brave girl, I want to see how brave she is when you tell her she's gonna die.
Dr. James Wilson: [long pause] Go to hell. (Episode 202)
Thus, while in the typical human personality, one?s id and superego often conflict, House?s lack of a strong superego enables his id to be the driving force of his personality, which is blatantly evident throughout each episode. House satisfies every whim, impulse and bodily gratification no matter how socially unacceptable and morally questionable it is. He flaunts his use of prostitutes and his habits of watching pornography. He frequently steals food from Wilson, lies to people and puts others in danger in order to satisfy his personal curiosity and boredom. He lives his life saying exactly what he wants and getting exactly what he wants no matter the social consequences, precisely because of his possession of a weak superego. House is a classic example of an unrestrained id that runs wild.
ANXIETY
Freud advances that anxiety poses the main threat to one?s psyche and can be triggered by the loss of a desired object, loss of love, loss of identity, or loss of love for one?s self. Furthermore, Freud argues that Thanatos, the impulse for self-destruction and death, is one of the methods that people succumb to in order to eliminate their anxiety. For in death, there is no more conflict (Frager and Fadiman 30). House?s loss of Stacy after he broke up with her qualifies as loss of love and resulted in a noticeable increase in his leg pain, which Freud would deem a hysterical symptom caused by increased anxiety. In addition, the prospect of getting back together with Stacy in season two arguably led to the loss of House?s identity as a miserable and an isolated human being. This must have led to an increase in his anxiety, which provoked him to resolve the anxiety by breaking up with her. Similarly, House?s romantic feelings for Dr. Cuddy in season five, evoked a great deal of anxiety because of the loss of his sense of identity as a rebel and emotionless hermit that his feelings for her, his boss, necessarily precipitates.
In addition, although House maintains an aura of invincibility to the outside world, what causes House to feel anxiety above all is losing his control over people and his own abilities, as well as the prospect of changing. In the pilot episode, House exhibits noticeable distress when Dr. Cuddy takes away his medical prerogative of running tests to prevent him from treating his patient. In doing so, Dr. Cuddy, in Freud?s terms caused House to lose a desired object i.e., his power to treat patients, which naturally provoked anxiety. In another instance, House would not allow Dr. Wilson to join his poker game because Wilson "Yeah. That's why you didn't want me in your poker game. Because when it comes to being in control, Gregory House leaves our faith healer kid in the dust. And that's why religious belief annoys you. Because if the universe operates by abstract rules you can learn them, you can protect yourself? (Episode 219). Under more careful scrutiny, it can be concluded that House?s desire for control does not stem from a fixation in the second stage of psychosexual development, the anal stage, where control and organization are prized above all. Rather, the likely reason for House?s need to control everything and everyone is the childhood abuse he suffered. When his father abused him, House?s control was taken away. He was helpless in face of a larger and stronger person that had all the control and inflicted on him physical and psychological pain. House therefore decided that if he had total control over everything, he could never get hurt again. This explains why Cuddy?s temporary restrictions on House?s abilities elicited so much distress. She made him helpless. This also explains why House?s leg pain is not just physical, and is instead the physical manifestation of his psychological anxiety. The sudden loss of the full function of his leg rendered him physically helpless once again, and stands as a constant reminder of the helplessness and lack of control that House spent his whole adult life trying to avoid since living under his father?s roof.
Because House was probably weaned prematurely as a baby, he did not develop trust in the world at large and especially in other human beings. This distrust was exacerbated by having his immediate caregiver, his father, abuse him throughout his childhood. His general distrust of others explains his consequential alienation of all those around him and his refusal to engage in any deep personal relationships. These tendencies were further intensified after his close romantic partner of several years, Stacy, betrayed him when he was most vulnerable, lying unconscious in a hospital bed, by going against his choice of treatment for his leg infarction. Despite his troubled past and lack of trust for humanity, he entered into a serious personal relationship with Stacy, and for what may have been the first time, he put his trust in her, and she violated his trust and went against his wishes when he was most helpless and when it concerned his physical body and well-being. It is for this reason that House chose to live a life of alienation, isolation and ultimately of misery.
In addition, because of the psychological pain that it evokes, House is vehemently resistant to changing for the better, and he likewise hates when others try to change from their own stuck pattern of misery and transcend their own circumstances because of the painful associations that House has with his own struggle with change. Because change for House necessitates trusting others, which is something that House has been traumatized from, it is an intolerable concept to him. House: "It's one of the great tragedies of life something always changes? (Episode 211). Change for House means risking himself once again and putting his trust in people and entering into personal relationships where those around him will once again have the potential to violate his trust and hurt him. Because of this, House puts his own welfare aside and chooses isolation instead of relationships that might make him happy. Being too close to people makes him anxious because of others? proven potential to hurt him. He thus dissects everyone and finds their miniscule flaws to invent reasons to evade a relationship. Wilson: "You always find some tiny little flaw to push people away.... I'm talking about every woman you've ever given a damn about.... You're going to wind up alone, House." (Episode 119). One more dialogue between House and Dr. Wilson sheds light on House?s reluctance to transcend his spiral into misery.
House: "I said I was an addict. I didn't say I had a problem. I pay my bills, I make my meals. I function."
Wilson: "Is that all you want? You have no relationships."
House: "I don't want any relationships."
Wilson: "You alienate people."
House: "I've been alienating people since I was three."
Wilson: "Oh, come on! Drop it! You don't think you've changed in the last few years?"
House: "Well, of, of course I have. I've, I've gotten older. My hair's gotten thinner. Sometimes I'm bored, sometimes I'm lonely, sometimes I wonder what it all means."
Wilson: "No, I was there! You are not just a regular guy who's getting older, you've changed! You're miserable, and you're afraid to face yourself."
House: "Of course I've changed!" (pointing to his leg)
Wilson: "And everything's the leg? Nothing's the pills? They haven't done a thing to you?"
House: "They let me do my job, and they take away my pain." (Episode 111)

One final line by Dr. Wilson gives a profound glimpse into why House hates change:

Wilson: "You don't like yourself. But you do admire yourself. It's all you've got, so you cling to it. You're so afraid if you change, you'll lose what makes you special. (long pause) Being miserable doesn't make you better than anybody else, House. It just makes you miserable." (Episode 211)

Change, therefore, makes House anxious. Furthermore, watching others change is similarly haunting to him. He would not allow Dr. Foreman to launch clinical trials on a new Huntington?s disease medication because it would further his career (Episode 508). Similarly, he harangued Wilson for breaking his cycle of going for the wrong women and declaring that he has changed. Lastly, he put Dr. Cuddy through psychological torture while she was adopting a baby, throwing vomit on her, as well as insisting that she would make a terrible mother, to prevent her from making a change that would make her happy. House needs others to be miserable just like him, in order to exonerate himself in his reluctance to improve himself.
According to Freud, oral behaviors, such as verbal aggression for oral aggressive characters, are exacerbated by anxiety (Frager and Fadiman 26). In Season 3, House was forced to go into withdrawal from Vicodin, and in doing so, suffered an incredible amount of leg pain as well as withdrawal symptoms. In Freud?s terms, House was experiencing ?realistic anxiety? because he was anxious about imminently experiencing the physical pain that he spent his life trying to avoid (http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/ 1O87-realisticanxiety.html). In concert with Freud?s theory that heightened anxiety leads oral aggressive characters to engage in more oral aggressive behaviors, during this time, House?s hostility, sarcasm and verbal cruelty increased dramatically. Dr. Cuddy, House?s boss, alluded to this after he yelled at her, ?It?s a good thing you didn?t become a mom, because you suck at it!? (Episode 309). When crying, she told Dr. Wilson, ?I've seen House be rude a thousand times, usually to achieve something. I have never seen him be mean just because he can. "People think House has no? inner censor. The fact is he holds himself back, because when he wants to hurt, he knows just where to poke a sharp stick."? (Episode 309). Thus, the source of House?s verbal aggression, namely the elevated pain in his leg, caused him to expend greater effort (impetus) at relieving the tension (the aim) by yelling more maliciously at whoever crossed him (the object, in this case, Dr. Cuddy).
More profoundly, when House experiences neurotic anxiety (i.e., anxiety subjective to the individual that no one else can adequately understand), this manifests in physical symptoms that Freud would relate to hysteria (http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/ anxiety.aspx). For example, after breaking up with the love of his life, Stacy, for a second time, so that he could continue, ?to be miserable,? the pain in his leg increased dramatically, causing him to seek means of relieving his pain that are more powerful. When Dr. Wilson refused to prescribe him more pain medication, because he knew that House?s pain had purely psychological roots, House turned to Dr. Cuddy for a shot of morphine. Although she was reluctant, she eventually conceded and gave him a shot, which alleviated his pain. She later revealed to House that the shot she gave him was in fact a placebo, and recommended he get psychological help (Episode 213). Additionally, in season 5, because of House?s repression of his romantic feelings for Cuddy, he began to hallucinate that he was being bitten by a mosquito after every encounter with her, complaining of the unbearable itch and scratching at it and bandaging his hand, until Wilson correctly diagnosed the psychological nature of his ?mosquito bite? (Episode 507).
THANATOS
House?s consistent aggression towards authority figures: the police, Dr. Cuddy, Mr. Vogler, who was House?s boss for a brief amount of time, accords with House?s strong Thanatos impulses. In addition, House has exhibited his strong urges of Thanatos to escape the anxiety of feeling physical pain or psychological pain of not knowing the answer to a question on numerous occasions. For example, to prove that his medical school enemy?s migraine cure did not work, he injected himself with nitroglycerin to induce a migraine and then he took his rival?s ?cure? only to discover that the ?cure? didn?t in fact work. He then used LSD, a dangerous hallucinogenic to moderate the migraine, along with anti-depressants to mediate the potent hallucinogenic effects of the LSD (Episode 212). He also faked brain cancer to qualify for a clinical trial that would place a chemical-dispensing chip into his limbic system to offset the unbearable pain in his leg (Episode 315). He injected himself with the tainted blood from a patient to see if a blood transfusion caused the patient?s symptoms (Episode 408). He stuck a knife into an electrical socket in order to temporarily kill himself to see if there was indeed an afterlife (Episode 403). After suffering amnesia from a bus accident, he took a dangerous amount of Alzheimer?s medication to remember the events leading up to the accident, which caused to him to have a heart attack (Episode 415). Finally, in an attempt to recover further memories of the events leading up to the accident, House agreed to stick electrodes in his already fractured skull, which emitted powerful currents, resulting in a seizure which could potentially have given him brain damage, and he fell into a coma (Episode 416). During this coma, he dreamt that he was sitting on the bus with his dead patient, and he expressed that he did not want to wake up from his coma because he did not want to feel pain anymore.
DEFENSE MECHANISMS
To cope with the traumas of his past and his persistent anxiety, House lives his life primarily through the defense mechanism of intellectualization. Intellectualization involves intellectualizing and reasoning to block confrontation with an unconscious conflict and its associated emotional stress. It entails removing one's self, emotionally, from a stressful event (Frager and Fadiman 34). Dr. Wilson aptly notes that House dismisses everything that is emotional and not purely rational. It is evident that House?s relentless rationality protects him from the world around him and from ever feeling emotional pain. House is known to say that everything is rational. This can be illustrated further with a few more instances throughout the series:
1. A nun: "You hide behind your intelligence."
House: Yeah, that's pretty stupid." (Episode 105)
2. A patient's wife: "You got a big 'Keep Out' sign stapled on your forehead." (Episode 112)
3. Wilson: Lisa (Dr. Cuddy) cares. It's why she drives you nuts. 'Cause it's not just a puzzle to her. The patients are actually real, their feelings actually relevant...." (Episode 203)
4. Wilson: Because if the universe operates by abstract rules you can learn them, you can protect yourself. If a Supreme Being exists he can squash you any time he wants."
House: "He knows where I am." (Episode 219)

5. Wilson: "Be yourself: cold, uncaring, distant.." (Episode 122)
House?s inhuman insistence on a purely rational approach to life even during circumstances that warrant emotional considerations now makes sense. His refusal to empathize with dying cancer girls, with Dr. Cuddy?s difficulties in adopting a child, with the problems of his team and with Dr. Wilson can be attributed to his fierce resistance to feeling any emotion at all because facing his own emotions would be too psychologically painful for him. Instead, House has created a barrier between himself and his emotions so that he could live his life invincibly without ever having to suffer the discomforts of self-examination (which is a function of one?s superego) and the misery he has suffered and that he continues to experience.
Finally, House?s contempt for all authority figures and consequent aggression towards them (Dr. Cuddy, Mr. Vogler, a police detective who almost got House thrown in jail for decades etc.) can be explained by a second defense mechanism, displacement. According to the psychodynamic theory, displacement occurs when one acts out their emotion, in this case aggression, on less threatening blameless targets, because acting it out on the actual target would be too dangerous (http://www.planetpsych.com/z Psychology_101/defense_mechanisms.htm). House displaces his anger and aggressive feelings for his father and his authoritarian way of life, onto less threatening targets. He lashes out at people below him, but more significantly at people above him, because he has created such an emotional barricade towards everyone that even his bosses and people in authority who have the power to fire him or throw him in jail are not threats that he perceives. The only actual threat that House perceives is his father.
Using Freud?s psychodynamic approach illustrates how Dr. Gregory House has developed into an oral aggressive character because of unconscious conflicts and past traumas. The traumas that occurred during his phallic stage prevented him from developing a strong superego, and instead caused him to negatively identify with his father?s strong sense of morality, which in effect allowed House?s id to dominate his personality, which accounts for his infantile and coarse behavior. House?s persistent anxiety exacerbates his oral aggression as well as causes him to succumb to his Thanatos urges of self-destruction. Furthermore, he copes with his anxiety through the defense mechanism of intellectualization, which allows him to distance his emotional self from his external situation, and instead intellectualizes everything in order to protect himself from getting hurt. He also displaces his aggression towards his father onto every other human being, who he deems a less threatening target. All of this combined has led to the creation of a truly fascinating and unique character that has captivated millions of viewers in the United States and abroad.

The major assignment for this course is an original research paper (roughly 20-25 pages in length) that examines some aspect of United States foreign policy with respect to a particular country and a particular situation. One of our texts for the course, John W. Creswell?s Research Design, will guide you through the stages and steps of doing standard social science research. In the remarks that follow, I want to add some comments?philosophical, conceptual, and practical?that might be helpful in approaching this assignment. I assume that you have had a standard IAS education in one of the concentrations, but maybe not had the opportunity to apply your knowledge, skills, and abilities in a project of original research. Here is that opportunity, and for those who have had the chance, here is another occasion to hone those skills and abilities. What follows is not a fully-developed essay, but rather some thoughts and talking points. I welcome your comments and ideas.
Your first and most important job will be to ask a question that no one knows the answer to, and then proceed to provide that answer. At first glance, it might appear that someone at some time has written something about everything, but that is not the case. Scholars and writers have written about only a minuscule fraction of what could be investigated and described. This is true for a host of reasons but the most significant are two: the world is enormously complex and the world is constantly changing. This does not mean that there aren?t patterns and generalities in human behavior and the institutions that attempt to organize it, but the patterns are not automatic. In other words, we can?t say that a particular life or situation is an example of a pattern until we investigate. This is a plea for research at the micro-level and to avoid the grand claims to universal truths.
The second job is taken care of for you by the subject matter of the class; namely, anything you investigate with respect to human rights matters. It is something significant because it is about human suffering or inequality or justice or dignity or freedom. Applying one?s mind, now made sharp as a tack by your IAS education, to things that matter is the responsibility of all intellectuals, but especially publicly-trained ones. The public has paid for most of your education and now you have a responsibility to give something back in the form of research that matters to the common good, in this case, represented by common knowledge.
Avoid seeking angles that promise to make the task easier. Choose hard cases and tough assignments and work at them. The rewards will be greater both in terms of your own learning and in terms of what matters. Choose issues and situations that reveal the world as it actually is, and not as it ought to be according to some ideology, including mine. That children are exploited in many parts of the world is true, but that does not mean that a particular child in Bangladesh who works in a factory is having her human rights violated. That must be demonstrated through argument and evidence.
Knowledge is social, that is, knowledge is knowledge when a group of people says it is. No matter how confidently I know that I saw Bigfoot on my camping trip, it isn?t knowledge until I can convince others. And to convince others I must use the tools that have been approved of by my society or subgroup within that society, in this case, the academic community. Those tools are of two kinds: evidence and argument. Evidence is what other scholars will accept as the facts of the case. They will only ?allow into evidence,? to use the legal way of expressing this, facts which have passed some tests: relevance, corroboration, representativeness of the whole. Irrelevant stories, isolated comments or anecdotes, heart-wrenching emotions, or isolated bits of information do not constitute evidence. Think of prisoners exonerated by DNA or the search for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
Evidence must fit into an argument, which does not mean debate, but rather a crafted series of statements connected by an acceptable logic. By logic we don?t just mean formal logic but rather an acceptable form of human reasoning. Take for example the precautionary principle which states that, given our current state of lack of knowledge, we ought not to do something. We cannot prove that continuing to heat up the earth?s atmosphere will have catastrophic effects, but we probably should act as if it is the case, in order to be safe. The precautionary principle is not a part of formal logic, but it is probably a prudent form of human reasoning.
The ultimate goal and highest compliment for a piece of research is that it is convincing. No argument will be perfect because of that complexity issue, again, not to mention the fact that time will not allow all possible research or the gathering of all possible facts. In the back of your mind, all research should be accompanied by the thought ?Based on what I?ve discovered so far . . . .? But at the same time, one must play fair and push the discovery as far as possible. That is how we make progress in what we know about the world. We are trying to convince each other that what we have discovered is important and true, knowing perfectly well that the latter two qualities can never be absolute.
Every piece of research, indeed, any claim about the world, is grounded in theory and you should actively work at identifying and interrogating your theories. I use the plural because we always use more than one in approaching a topic or issue and sometimes they are coherently linked, and sometimes not. At a bare minimum, we should all be familiar with what theories we use to explain the following: reality, the world, social behavior, political behavior, human psychology. A theory of reality forces us to ask about what is and what isn?t:
? Is happiness possible? Should we count on it? Is it the ultimate reality? Do rights exist? If so, where do they reside? What is morality? Does evil exist?
? What causes the world and its institutions?states, markets, cultures?to act the way they do? What?s driving the big shifts in globalization and world power? Why don?t countries respect the human rights of their own citizens and why don?t they intervene in acts of genocide?
? Why do people form into groups and why to these groups act the way they do? Why does one ethnic group or religion hate and fear another? Why, in general, do we find differences in how men and women act toward each other? Can human rights change these relationships? How, exactly?
? How is power distributed? Who has most and why? Can power be opposed, harnessed, co-opted, abandoned? What are the ways that people organize themselves into relations of power? Do organizations like Amnesty International really make a difference?
? Why would one person torture another? What is it in human psychology that makes this possible (and the evidence is that we?re all capable of it)? What is the difference between dignity and humiliation? How do you get someone to do the right thing? Is it even possible?

Whether you know it or not, you have theories that answer these questions, either because you?ve constructed them over the course of your life, consciously and unconsciously, or because you?ve been exposed to, and been convinced by, arguments advanced in your formal education. These theories can be more or less sophisticated, more or less helpful, and more or less correct; theories are not just speculation or guesses, but an interrelated set of concepts that claim to explain some phenomenon. Some do better than others. Any piece of research assumes theories. For your paper, I want you to identify the relevant theories that ground your argument. Sometimes you?ll just have to assume these theories and sometimes you?ll have to explain and defend them. The Dunne and Wheeler book is mostly about theories.
The earlier you choose your topic the better off you?ll be because you?ll have more time to read and think about it and more time to pay attention to other instances and related issues. Do not be too fussy about choosing a perfect topic?virtually any country will reveal a host of potential human rights problems or solutions (your paper can be about a human rights success). Remember that your paper is about U.S. human rights policy, so you must include an element of policy in the paper, namely, what is the U.S. doing to help or hinder the problem. For example, that child working in the factory; how is U.S. policy affecting her? Is it making her life better or worse? How and why?
Yes, the United States is guilty of human rights violations within its borders (the potential violation of habeas corpus at Guantanamo Bay is a recent example, but also endemic racism and domestic violence), but we will be looking outward to the relation between the United States and other countries, therefore, you cannot choose the U.S. as your focus for this project.
The next step after choosing a country is to choose a problematic case. This should be one that has a concrete and specific case as the focus, a case that tests the theories and arguments employed. The case can come from a newspaper article, a human rights report, or a legal case. For example, Mohammed Mahmoud Osman died two days after being released from a Cairo police station with extensive bruises over his body. Is it a human rights violation? Or just a civil matter? How should U.S. policy react to this, if at all? Should the President, the Congress, the American public get involved? Can they? What would the repercussions be? What?s realistic? Why? Where does the Osman case fit into the larger picture? Who is responsible?
The crucial thing here is not just to document suffering or purported violations, but to examine a complex case that can be analyzed from more than one point of view. In human rights work it is tempting to identify with victims and just write from one?s moral outrage over violations of the innocent. But in this class we are focusing on policy, and policy is a complex phenomenon that is not the simple application of morality to power. Choose a case that will not have an easy answer

There are faxes for this order.

I need a (6) six-page essay on the World Literature course.
There are four separate questions that need to be answered thoroughly.
Please use one page per question except for essays #2 & #4 which should be about 2 pages each.
I'll include all the literature textbook materials.



1)
Many critics see Robert Browning as a "psychological poet," one who is more modern to us, than other Victorian writers. In what sense is "My Last Duchess" an exploration of abnormal psychology and human evil? How does Browning convincingly portray the complexity of human psychology in ways that make sense to us today?
Your answer should be at least two paragraphs long and should include specific references to the text. Make sure to include a discussion of the Duke's character in your response. Be sure to proofread your answer.
(Read pages 707,709-710, 912-answer key)



2)
Two of the stories you've read in this lesson have commented on the importance or unimportance of money and the lengths to which individuals will go to increase their wealth. How do the authors (Chekhov and de Maupassant) differ in their comments? How are they the same?
Read these two stories and compare and contrast their general comments about greed. Consider the some following things in your comparisons: theme, tone, setting, and characters. Use at least three specific examples from each text to support your argument.
Your response should be at least three paragraphs long and be written in good essay form. (Thesis statement, introduction, supporting details, and conclusion). Be sure to proofread your answer for spelling and grammar errors.
(Read pages 765,767-772,775-781)



3)
In your opinion, do you think the selection On the Bottom by Primo Levi could act as the most powerful deterrent against another Holocaust? Do you agree that keeping the memory of the Holocaust alive will make it less likely that such an event will occur again? What value do you see in reading and studying Holocaust literature?
Use examples from the texts to support your answer.
Your essay should be two paragraphs in length.
Read pages 832-838, 1065



4)
Read the short story The Bet by Anton Chekhov and explain how it meets or does not meet the requirements of a modern short story, as explained in your text.
Your response should be at least three paragraphs long, explain the criteria you used to evaluate the story, and explain whether or not the story meets the criteria.
Read pages 766-772, 1043



There are faxes for this order.

Customer is requesting that (Serban) completes this order.

The Film Paper
Due no later than Wed. Nov. 12

The film paper should be a reaction paper of no less than 3 pages in length. As the syllabus states, it is for the purpose of getting you to see the world from the eyes of others. The paper should convince me that you actually watched the movie, but should not be a blow by blow description. Dont just tell me the plot. I want your thoughts on the film not the plot. For example: Did you like it? Why? Did you not like it? Why? Did it cause you to view things in a different light? Why? What did it make you think about? Did it lead you to question some of your beliefs or did it confirm them? Why?

You need not try to analyze the film's technical or artistic aspects though you may include such considerations if you wish.

There is a list of recommended films in Course Documents, but you are not restricted to these. However, if you wish to view a different one, you need to get approval from me first.

Foreign language films are available for free at the Wood County Public Library and can be rented from Video Spectrum. There are a few at Jerome Library in VHS format.
RECOMMENDED FOREIGN FILMS
Just a small sampling

Note: There are dubbed versions out there. Dont get them. Get the versions that are subtitled in order to experience the actual acting of the original cast. Also, language and how it is delivered affects your understanding of and emotional response to the film.

For the novice: These films are in color; have standard, modern, U.S. production values; and have a more-or-less easy-to-follow narrative.

The Return of Martin Guerre (French. Based on true story. Young man goes away to war in 16th century France and then returns. Or is it really him? Stars Gerard Depardieu and Nathalie Baye who played Leonardo Dicaprios mom in Catch Me If You Can.)
Antonias Line (Netherlands. Feminist tale of woman deciding to not remarry in rural Netherlands.)
Au Revoir, Les Enfants (French. Based on directors experience as young boy in private school during Nazi occupation in France and the fate of a Jewish boy in the school.)
Cinema Paradiso (Italy. Young man grows up in southern Italy, taking photos and eventually becoming movie director)
Cyrano de Bergerac (French version of famous play with Gerard Depardieu.)
Das Boot (German World War II submarine story. The Germans are the good guys.)
Dona Flora and Her Two Husbands (Brazil. Dona Floras first husbands ghost shows up to make her life spicy.)
Il Postino (Italy. Lovely movie about a particular place and time on an Italian island, seen through the eyes of the local postman.)
Germinal (French. Story of miners in 19th century France based on Zolas book. Excellent example of class differences. With Gerard Depardieu.)
Chinese Ghost Story (Hong Kong, fun kung fu movie with a Chinese vampire and ghosts.)
Jean de Florette (French, directed by Claude Berri and stars Gerard Depardieu. Its sequel, Manon of the Spring, is even better.)
La Nuit de Varenne (Thomas Paine, played by Harvey Keitel, and Casanova travel together with others in the wake of Marie Antoinette as she flees revolutionaries.)
Mon Oncle dAmerique (French study of the underpinnings of human psychology, with Gerard Depardieu)
Pelle the Conqueror (Danish/Swedish. Swedish immigrants in Denmark. Directed by Billie August and starring Max van Sydow.)
Downfall (German. About Hitlers last days in his Berlin bunker)
The Ninth Day (German by Volker Schlondorff. A Catholic priest is given a nine day leave from a Nazi concentration camp and told he must do the Nazis bidding.)
Paradise Now. (Palestinian. Two young men decide to become suicide bombers. A very intense film.)
Motorcycle Diaries (in Spanish - Young Ernesto Che Guevara and his friend take a road trip from Argentina to Peru.)
Water (by Deepa Mehta from India Hindu scripture says that widows must withdraw from public life and never marry again, even if they are child brides and child widows.)
The next three movies are all directed by Zhang Yimou and star Gong Li, two of the best known Chinese outside of China:
Raise the Red Lantern (Chinese. Originally banned in China. Tale of young girl sent to be fourth wife of landlord and the claustrophobic life that the woman must lead.
Red Sorghum (Chinese. About Japanese occupation in China during WWII.)
To Live (Chinese. Also originally banned in China. Tale of one familys travails through much of 20th century China. Shows the vast political changes and difficulties of that period.)
The Story of the Weeping Camel (Directed by Byambasuren Davaa, Luigi Falorni 2003. A simple and very touching story of a baby camel and its mother who rejects it and of the Mongolian family who owns the camels and try their best to get the mother to accept the baby so that it wont starve.)


For the more adventuresome: They may be in black and white or they may have narratives that are not quite so linear, or they may have acting or art direction that does not follow modern, U.S. aesthetics.

Close to Eden (Mongolian, Chinese and Russian. Modern Sino-Mongolian nomad family befriends Russian truck driver. Mongolian father goes to town to get condoms and brings home television.)
Nosferatu (German silent film. Dracula story with a twist. Remade in the 1980s by Werner Herzog, but the silent version is the best and is in my Top 10 Movies Ever list.) Also by Herzog, Aguirre, the Wrath of God (a Spanish conquistador in South America goes mad)
Ran (Japanese. A retelling of King Lear by Akira Kurosawa.)
Any movie by Akira Kurosawa. Dreams was one of his last movies and features several short stories. The Seven Samurai is one of his best known movies and was remade in the U.S. as The Magnificent Seven. In the Japanese version, a group of out-of-luck samurai are hired to defend a peasant village from local bandits. Rashoman is a tale of how stories can change based on your point of view. A robbery/ rape/ murder is retold by the criminal, the woman who was raped, a bystander, and even the murdered husband (through a medium). Throne of Blood (retelling of Macbeth in Japan.)
Alexander Nevsky (Russians defend their homeland against Teutonic knights)
Any of the Apu Trilogy movies. Director Satyajit Ray of India. Tells of boy growing up in Indian village and eventually moving to the city. Includes Pather Panchali, Aparajito and The World of Apu, The first and third are the better ones.
The Ballad of Narayama (Japanese, tells of a cultural minority in Japan, similarly regarded as Appalachian hillbillies in the U.S.)
Beauty and the Beast (French, director is Cocteau)
The Bicycle Thief (Italian. Life in Italy just following World War II)
Black Orpheus (Brazilian) Retelling of the Greek Orpheus myth in modern Brazil. Also, Orphee (Retelling of the Orpheus myth by French director Cocteau.)
The Blue Angel (German cabaret floozy [Marlene Dietrich] seduces a pompous high school teacher. Avoid the English language version at all cost; its not the same film.)
The Bridge (German teenagers must defend the village bridge against the advancing Americans in 1945.)
Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (German, silent. Another great Weimar film using Expressionist sets.)
Children of Paradise (French classic about theater folk in 1830s Paris. Filmed during the Nazi occupation. Called the French Gone With the Wind.)
Come and See (Soviet World War II film. As fine a WWII film as any anywhere.)
Day for Night (French, director is Francois Truffaut. Story about making a film.)
Fanny and Alexander (Swedish. director Ingmar Bergmans last film. Two children growing up in an interesting, and sometimes magical, household. Any of Bergmans films are worth watching.) Also by Bergman, The Seventh Seal about a Scandinavian knight back from the Crusades, who plays a game of chess with Death.
Farewell My Concubine (Chinese. Also originally banned in China. The life of a Chinese opera singer from his boyhood through the Cultural Revolution. Be forewarned that it is brutal and knowledge of 20th century Chinese history is helpful. Visually stunning. Dircted by Chen Kaige.)
Fellinis Satyricon (Italian director Fellinis take on an ancient Roman novel.) Also by Fellini, La Strada (a traveling strong man and a clown vie for the attentions of a simple girl.)
Fires on the Plain (Japanese World War II film.)
The 400 Blows (French, director is Francois Truffaut. Autobiographical tale about 12 year old boy in Paris in the 1950s. Hes a bit of a scamp. Good look at French education system at the time.)
Grand Illusion (French. French prisoners of war escape a German POW camp during World War I. Directed by Jean Renoir, son of the famous painter.)
Harp of Burma (Japanese. One of the great war films of all time.)
M (German, Peter Lorre as a child murderer, filmed before he moved to Hollywood.)
Paisan (1946, Roberto Rosselini director and he and Fellini as writers. About U.S. soldiers landing in Italy during World War II and working their way north through the country. In English and Italian.)
Secret Ballot (Iranian, banned in Iran. How elections are conducted in Iran.)
Small Change (French, another Francois Truffaut movie about kids. Interesting to compare school system with the one portrayed in The 400 Blows.)
Wings of Desire (German, angels in Berlin, including Peter Falk. Directed by Wim Wenders.)
Girl from Hunan (Chinese by Xie Fei, U Lan 1988) A girl of 13 is married off to a boy of 2 in a Chinese village. Beautifully photographed.

On the surface, the Niebelungenlied and Bruni?s History of the Florentine People would seem radically dissimilar in their form and structure. One is a chivalric epic, the other a Humanist history. Yet beneath the surface, there are striking similarities connecting the two works. Please write an essay comparing the two works. As the basis for the comparison choose one item from each of the two lists below.
A: Differences:
1) Style ? prose vs. verse
2) Theoretical/Conceptual filter ? chivalric romance vs. Thucydidean history
B: Similarities
1) Each author has a clear agenda
2) Both works constitute a critique of feudal monarchy
3) In both works we see the theme of the "outsider" who subverts the political system
4) Both authors show a keen interest in human psychology in their examination of character
5) Both works represent early forms of individualism
In the conclusion, please speak to a final question, albeit one that is rather contentious: to what extent are both works "modern"?

IMPORTANT: I give below directions as to how you should apply the Case
Resolution Model (CRM) to a case.
The directions I give sometimes expand on what your textbook says, and
sometimes tells you to do something differently than what the textbook says.
Please make sure that you follow my directions. If I tell you to do something
differently than the book does, please ignore the book and do what I say.
Among other things, this means that objecting to my grading with but the book
does it like this on page XYZ is not a valid objection.
You will see as you read below that I am using the textbooks CRM as a steppingstone
to something I consider to be better and clearer. So to make this even more
evident, let us call this new and hopefully improved model UCRM. From now on I
will be asking you to apply the UCRM, not the CRM, to cases.
Below, you will find directions about what to do at each of the 8 steps of the
UCRM. When you are doing this, please make sure that you name and/or number
the step you are doing. I do not want to guess what you are doing at any point! I
should be able to say, at any point in your assignment, something like the
sentence I am reading now is part of step X, whatever number that X might be.
I will not grade assignments that do not follow these instructions.
(1) Present the Problem
Here you will lay out the moral problem that needs to be solved as concisely as possible.
Do not spend a lot of time on the facts of the case since you will do this anyhow while
collecting the facts in the next section.
(2) Collect the facts
Each moral case has to be evaluated by looking at two things. First, one needs to
determine the facts of the case. And then one has to look at the values or evaluative
principles that can be brought to bear on these facts.
If you compare moral evaluation to a court case, this is the point at which the prosecutor
presents the jury with all the facts and evidence that pertains to the case (for example
Mr. X. was wounded, the bullet that did the wounding ballistically matches the gun
found in the bushes, and the gun belongs to Mr. Y).
In this imaginary court case, there is as yet no discussion of the legal principles (laws) that
will be applied to these facts.
In similar fashion, in this section, you need to list all and only the facts that seem to be
relevant to the moral evaluation of the case. Do not yet go into the values or the
evaluative principles; these you will investigate in the next section.
(3) List the relevant values
This is where, in a court case, the judge will inform the jury about the laws that apply to
such a case, and the various outcomes prescribed by the law: If the facts indicate that
the defendant did commit the crime, and that he did this with pre-meditation, then your
verdict will be that he is guilty of first-degree murder. And if you find the defendant
guilty of first degree murder, then you can give him a prison sentence between 22 to 35
years, etc.
Your book is not very clear about the nature of the values you are supposed to bring in at
this stage. Nevertheless, what they seem to have in mind are values such as beneficence
and respect, namely the main values they focus in the text (see p. 75, the section called
Articulating Holism through the Values Approach). Consequently, what I would like
you to do is to ultimately tie in any value you mention to one of these values. For
example, if you think that the privacy of individuals is a value at stake in a given case,
then I would expect you to tie this value to the value of respecting persons.
To make sure thats you do not ignore this, and to make it easier on me to follow your
evaluation, I will require you to boldface the primary value or values you invoke in this
paragraph. For example, if one of the primary values you invoke is respect, then I expect
you to boldface its just like I have done in this sentence.
(4) Explore the options
We are now at the heart of the UCRM. This is where youre supposed to apply the
theories you investigated in Chapter 5 to the case at hand, and decide which theory
prescribes which course of action.
I am hereby limiting the number of theories you need to apply to just three:
Consequentialism
Duty theory
Virtue theory
All three of these theories have to be applied; you cannot choose to apply some
other theory in place of one of these. Since some people in the past have said that they
have not understood what this means, I repeat: you have to apply Consequentialism,
Duty Theory, and Virtue Theory??"no exceptions. After you have finished your
assignment, go back to step four and take another look at it. If you have not applied one of
these theories, then youre guaranteed to lose points: take remedial action.
If you are interested, youre more than welcome to apply additional theories. But no
matter how many additional theories you apply, this will not replace the points you will
lose if you have failed to apply one of the theories mentioned above.
Here is how you should apply each theory:
Consequentialism: as you know from your textbook and the additional material I put
online, consequentialism is a comparative theory. It is a theory that compares more than
one course of action, and chooses the one which is optimal (optimal according to the
criteria of consequentialism, not your or my criteria. This is very important to keep in
mind). So the first thing you need to do is determine at least two alternative courses of
action one can follow, and tell me clearly what these are.
When you have more than one course of action outlined, you then need to consider the
positive and negative consequences of each course of action. When youre doing this, you
need to make sure that you consider the consequences to all those affected by the course
of action you are considering. For example, if youre a police officer and the course of
action youre contemplating is to shoot a criminal, you need to consider how your action
will affect the significant others of the criminal (among other things).
Once youre finished with listing the positive and negative consequences of the courses of
action you have focused on, you then need to compare these results and determine which
course of action maximizes utility (take another look at the Notes on Consequentialism
document I put online if you do not remember what maximizing utility means). I
emphasize, compare. If you just say that one course of action maximizes utility
without explaining why it has better utility in comparison with other courses of
action, you are not responding correctly to what I am asking.
So here is what I suggest: I will give the below the framework of how I expect you to
apply consequentialism and if you wish, you can copy and paste this in your assignment.
You can then fill in the details.
Course of Action 1: (here you write the description of the first course of action)
Affected parties: (here you list all those affected by this course of action)
Positive consequences: (here you describe the positive consequences of this course
of action)
Negative consequences: (here you describe the negative consequences of this
course of action)
Course of Action 2: (here you write the description of the second course of action)
Affected parties: (here you list all those affected by this course of action)
Positive consequences: (here you describe the positive consequences of this course
of action)
Negative consequences: (here you describe the negative consequences of this
course of action)
Outcome: The Xth course of action maximizes utility because (here you explain why you
think that the overall utility of the Xth course of action is more than all the others).
Duty Theory: Your textbooks discussion of Duty Theory is very sketchy. Its biggest
weakness is that it doesnt tell you how one determines what ones duties are. The
authors make it sound like one can pull duties off the air.
I cannot remedy this without changing the nature of this course drastically. So, I will let
you pull duties off the air, o to speak. But there are two things I would like you to do:
a. (a) Distinguish legal duties from moral duties, and distinguish both from
company policy. In other words, do not assume that a given companys policy
imposes any legal or moral duties on you (in fact it is sometimes possible for a
company policy to be both illegal and immoral). And do not assume that a legal
duty is a moral duty??"it is possible that some laws are immoral. Whether one
has the moral duty to obey immoral laws is a controversial issue.
So ignore the company policy (if there are any), and the legal duties (if there
are any), and focus on the moral duties. Dont even mention legal and
policy-based duties (unless you really think that they are relevant to the moral
duties). This is a course on ethics, not the law. Of course, we hope that
company policies are both legal and moral, and we hope that all of our laws are
morally acceptable. This is the ideal we all strive for. But we should keep in
mind that we cannot assume that we or anyone else has reached this ideal. In
any case, since this is a course about morality, we should keep that foremost
in our minds. Morality is primary, and it ought to inform both the legal system
and managerial policy.
a. (b) Even if you are pulling duties off the air, make sure that you are invoking
the widest general duty you can. What I mean is this: if I invoke a duty such as
not using too much salt in my cooking, this is presumably because I have a
wider duty to serve healthy meals. And the duty to serve healthy meals
presumably derives from a wider duty such as not causing unnecessary harm
to others and myself. When invoking a duty, make sure to invoke the widest,
the most inclusive duty--and then explain why that duty prescribes a specific
course of action.
So your explanation should be something like this: the duty not to harm others
unnecessarily means that I should not be cooking meals with too much salt,
because too much salt is unnecessary and harmful to people in the long run.
Finally, do not diminish the complexity of the cases we are dealing with by just
mentioning one duty. When we are dealing with moral problems, in 99% of the cases, we
are dealing with a clash of multiple duties (this, from the perspective of duty theory).
There is more than one duty in the picture and the real difficulty of the case is to
determine which one gains the upper hand. So, mention all the duties that are relevant to
the case and explain which one gets priority and why. Do not ignore the why!
Also, if and when you invoke a duty, make sure to consider all the responsibilities that
duty places on the person in question. So, say you invoke the duty of loyalty when
discussing what a soldier should do in a morally complex situation in war. Let us say her
commander has just told her to torch an enemy village. Here, loyalty places
responsibilities on her not only vis a vis her immediate commander, but also the larger
military institution of which she is a part. Maybe loyalty to the commander would
suggest that she follow the order, but loyalty to the larger military institution would
suggest that she disobey the order as going against the moral code of that institution.
Remember that life is rarely as simple as movies and TV tend to suggest.
Virtue Theory: I expanded on your books treatment of Virtue Theory in the document
called Notes on Virtue Theory in the week 4 folder. What I need to remind you here is
this: just like duty theory, virtue theory suffers from the problem of determining where
virtues come from. Once again, I will let you invoke any virtue you wish, as long as you
follow the policy I outlined in (b) above under Duty Theory. That is, always invoke the
widest virtue possible, and show how it prescribes a specific course of action.
One common mistake in applying Virtue Theory is to forget to invoke any virtues.
People quite often say something like Virtue theory says we should do what a virtuous
person (or, a person who wishes to do the right thing) should do and so they should do
X. But notice that no virtue has been mentioned??"so we have no idea why X should be
done by a virtuous person!
Just as above, do not diminish the complexity of the cases we are dealing with by just
mentioning one virtue--mention all the virtues that are relevant to the case and explain
which one gets priority and why. Do not ignore the why!
Hence make sure you specifically mention the virtues you think are relevant to the case
(such as honesty, courage, etc.), explain which of them gets priority, and also explain what
course of action that virtue prescribes.
Read the last paragraph of the section on Duty Theory, except thinking now in terms of
virtues as opposed to duties. Remember that the same virtue can suggest conflicting
courses of action (just like duties) in the same situation.
(5) Assess the rightness or wrongness of various outcomes
I believe that this step of the CRM confuses people rather than helping them resolve a
moral problem. So I am canceling this step. SKIP STEP 5, but keep the original
numbering of the others steps.
(6) Decide
Keep this short. Just tell me what you have decided to do as concisely as you can.
Try to avoid being too wishy-washy here. For example, the authors prescription for
Abdul on page 156 of your textbook is too wishy-washy. They say Abdul should look
for some creative way to educate the clients. What creative way? Can you imagine a
general giving an order that goes Find a creative way to flank the enemy!? Or a
cookbook that says and then find a creative way to put all the ingredients together?
So please try to be much more precise in your prescriptions. For example, Abdul should
mistakenly forward to the client some links to newspaper articles about security problems
of firms that tried to cut too many corners. By doing this, he can further inform the
owners of the risk they are taking without appearing to do so.
(7) Defend
This is where you defend your decision. You try to come up with all the morally relevant
reasons for choosing the way you did. You can appeal to the prescriptions of the theories
you applied in step four, you can appeal to other moral reasons or values you hold. If you
happen to be taken by one of the theories discussed in the textbook, including the ones
you applied, feel free to say that you are adopting theory X, and for that reason you
would abide by its prescription. In other words, if while applying the three theories
in step 4, you fall in love with one of them, you can give priority to its support
(while bringing in other support as well). If you have decided on a course of action
prescribed by none of the theories, please make sure that you explain which moral value(s)
influence your decision.
(8) REFLECT
In this step, whatever else you do, do not forget to consider possible objections to your
chosen course of action (the decision you described in step 6). This means (a) stepping
into the shoes of a potential critic and trying to find the biggest problem with your
decision, and (b) stepping back into your own shoes and trying to find a response to that
criticism.
Performing the mental shift described in (b) will be the very difficult for most of you.
It requires you to step out of your own shoes and to step into the shoes of the opposing
viewpoint, so to speak. You are then supposed to attempt to undermine your own
position by finding the weakest point in it. This is not something most of us are used to
do in the daily course of our lives; but it is a crucial component of critical thinking and
intellectual honesty. Sometimes, it enables us to strengthen our position (by finding a
response to the objection, as requested in (b) )??"sometimes, it shows us that we have
been holding an untenable position and hence enables us to avoid a mistake.
Please make sure you are not presenting objections that are transparently faulty (and
hence easy to answer). If you are capable of easily detecting a problem with what you give
as an objection, thi means that you can most probably devise an improved objection that
avoids such transparent mistakes.
Here is a short example to illustrate: (In the example, I am not trying to make the
arguments flawless??"that is not the point. The point is to illustrate the argumentobjection-
response structure I describe above):
I decided in step 6 that Miss Jones should apologize to her subordinate.
{This is your decision. Now we change shoes and start (a)}
One might object to this as follows: if a person of higher rank apologizes to a subordinate, this is
tantamount to losing all credibility and workplace discipline. If Ms. Jones apologizes, she will
lose all her effectiveness.
{In the next paragraph, I step back into my shoes and respond to the objection??"this
is (b)}
This objection is based on a simplistic view of human psychology. If a higher-ranking official has
made a mistake, apologizing for the mistake does not make her lose credibility, it increases her
credibility! As long as such mistakes do not abound, she will be seen as a more credible and just
administrator for recognizing and facing up to her own mistakes. Instead, failing to apologize
multiplies her mistakes!
This example should give you a clear indication of what I am looking for in step 8.
Good luck!


Customer is requesting that (Whitecap) completes this order.

1)
Many critics see Robert Browning as a "psychological poet," one who is more modern to us, than other Victorian writers. In what sense is "My Last Duchess" an exploration of abnormal psychology and human evil? How does Browning convincingly portray the complexity of human psychology in ways that make sense to us today? Your answer should be at least two paragraphs long and should include specific references to the text. Make sure to include a discussion of the Duke's character in your response. Be sure to proofread your answer.

2)
Four of the stories you've read in this lesson have commented on the importance or unimportance of money and the lengths to which individuals will go to increase their wealth. How do the authors (Tolstoy, Chekhov, de Maupassant, and Lawrence) differ in their comments? How are they the same? Choose two of the stories and compare and contrast their general comments about greed. Consider the some following things in your comparisons: theme, tone, setting, and characters. Use at least three specific examples from each text to support your argument. Your response should be at least three paragraphs long and be written in good essay form. (Thesis statement, introduction, supporting details, and conclusion). Be sure to proofread your answer for spelling and grammar errors.

Book: Morality and the Professional Life Values at Work by Cynthia A. Brincat & Victoria S. Wike
Chapter 6, Exercise 3 (pp. 163-65) [25 pts.]
Choose only one of the four cases in the exercises listed on the pages above, and apply the CRM as explained in the UCRM_Directions.rtf document in the Week 5 folder (this week's folder). Please do not write just some kind of essay about the case you chose, without imposing this structure on it. The CRM structure is a must.

Such a detailed analysis should take at least 1500 words.

IMPORTANT: I give below directions as to how you should apply the Case
Resolution Model (CRM) to a case.
The directions I give sometimes expand on what your textbook says, and
sometimes tells you to do something differently than what the textbook says.
Please make sure that you follow my directions. If I tell you to do something
differently than the book does, please ignore the book and do what I say.
Among other things, this means that objecting to my grading with but the book
does it like this on page XYZ is not a valid objection.
You will see as you read below that I am using the textbooks CRM as a steppingstone
to something I consider to be better and clearer. So to make this even more
evident, let us call this new and hopefully improved model UCRM. From now on I
will be asking you to apply the UCRM, not the CRM, to cases.
Below, you will find directions about what to do at each of the 8 steps of the
UCRM. When you are doing this, please make sure that you name and/or number
the step you are doing. I do not want to guess what you are doing at any point! I
should be able to say, at any point in your assignment, something like the
sentence I am reading now is part of step X, whatever number that X might be.
I will not grade assignments that do not follow these instructions.
(1) Present the Problem
Here you will lay out the moral problem that needs to be solved as concisely as possible.
Do not spend a lot of time on the facts of the case since you will do this anyhow while
collecting the facts in the next section.
(2) Collect the facts
Each moral case has to be evaluated by looking at two things. First, one needs to
determine the facts of the case. And then one has to look at the values or evaluative
principles that can be brought to bear on these facts.
If you compare moral evaluation to a court case, this is the point at which the prosecutor
presents the jury with all the facts and evidence that pertains to the case (for example
Mr. X. was wounded, the bullet that did the wounding ballistically matches the gun
found in the bushes, and the gun belongs to Mr. Y).
In this imaginary court case, there is as yet no discussion of the legal principles (laws) that
will be applied to these facts.
In similar fashion, in this section, you need to list all and only the facts that seem to be
relevant to the moral evaluation of the case. Do not yet go into the values or the
evaluative principles; these you will investigate in the next section.
(3) List the relevant values
This is where, in a court case, the judge will inform the jury about the laws that apply to
such a case, and the various outcomes prescribed by the law: If the facts indicate that
the defendant did commit the crime, and that he did this with pre-meditation, then your
verdict will be that he is guilty of first-degree murder. And if you find the defendant
guilty of first degree murder, then you can give him a prison sentence between 22 to 35
years, etc.
Your book is not very clear about the nature of the values you are supposed to bring in at
this stage. Nevertheless, what they seem to have in mind are values such as beneficence
and respect, namely the main values they focus in the text (see p. 75, the section called
Articulating Holism through the Values Approach). Consequently, what I would like
you to do is to ultimately tie in any value you mention to one of these values. For
example, if you think that the privacy of individuals is a value at stake in a given case,
then I would expect you to tie this value to the value of respecting persons.
To make sure thats you do not ignore this, and to make it easier on me to follow your
evaluation, I will require you to boldface the primary value or values you invoke in this
paragraph. For example, if one of the primary values you invoke is respect, then I expect
you to boldface its just like I have done in this sentence.
(4) Explore the options
We are now at the heart of the UCRM. This is where youre supposed to apply the
theories you investigated in Chapter 5 to the case at hand, and decide which theory
prescribes which course of action.
I am hereby limiting the number of theories you need to apply to just three:
Consequentialism
Duty theory
Virtue theory
All three of these theories have to be applied; you cannot choose to apply some
other theory in place of one of these. Since some people in the past have said that they
have not understood what this means, I repeat: you have to apply Consequentialism,
Duty Theory, and Virtue Theory??"no exceptions. After you have finished your
assignment, go back to step four and take another look at it. If you have not applied one of
these theories, then youre guaranteed to lose points: take remedial action.
If you are interested, youre more than welcome to apply additional theories. But no
matter how many additional theories you apply, this will not replace the points you will
lose if you have failed to apply one of the theories mentioned above.
Here is how you should apply each theory:
Consequentialism: as you know from your textbook and the additional material I put
online, consequentialism is a comparative theory. It is a theory that compares more than
one course of action, and chooses the one which is optimal (optimal according to the
criteria of consequentialism, not your or my criteria. This is very important to keep in
mind). So the first thing you need to do is determine at least two alternative courses of
action one can follow, and tell me clearly what these are.
When you have more than one course of action outlined, you then need to consider the
positive and negative consequences of each course of action. When youre doing this, you
need to make sure that you consider the consequences to all those affected by the course
of action you are considering. For example, if youre a police officer and the course of
action youre contemplating is to shoot a criminal, you need to consider how your action
will affect the significant others of the criminal (among other things).
Once youre finished with listing the positive and negative consequences of the courses of
action you have focused on, you then need to compare these results and determine which
course of action maximizes utility (take another look at the Notes on Consequentialism
document I put online if you do not remember what maximizing utility means). I
emphasize, compare. If you just say that one course of action maximizes utility
without explaining why it has better utility in comparison with other courses of
action, you are not responding correctly to what I am asking.
So here is what I suggest: I will give the below the framework of how I expect you to
apply consequentialism and if you wish, you can copy and paste this in your assignment.
You can then fill in the details.
Course of Action 1: (here you write the description of the first course of action)
Affected parties: (here you list all those affected by this course of action)
Positive consequences: (here you describe the positive consequences of this course
of action)
Negative consequences: (here you describe the negative consequences of this
course of action)
Course of Action 2: (here you write the description of the second course of action)
Affected parties: (here you list all those affected by this course of action)
Positive consequences: (here you describe the positive consequences of this course
of action)
Negative consequences: (here you describe the negative consequences of this
course ofaction)
Outcome: The Xth course of action maximizes utility because (here you explain why you
think that the overall utility of the Xth course of action is more than all the others).
Duty Theory: Your textbooks discussion of Duty Theory is very sketchy. Its biggest
weakness is that it doesnt tell you how one determines what ones duties are. The
authors make it sound like one can pull duties off the air.
I cannot remedy this without changing the nature of this course drastically. So, I will let
you pull duties off the air, so to speak. But there are two things I would like you to do:
a. (a) Distinguish legal duties from moral duties, and distinguish both from
company policy. In other words, do not assume that a given companys policy
imposes any legal or moral duties on you (in fact it is sometimes possible for a
company policy to be both illegal and immoral). And do not assume that a legal
duty is a moral duty??"it is possible that some laws are immoral. Whether one
has the moral duty to obey immoral laws is a controversial issue.
So ignore the company policy (if there are any), and the legal duties (if there
are any), and focus on the moral duties. Dont even mention legal and
policy-based duties (unless you really think that they are relevant to the moral
duties). This is a course on ethics, not the law. Of course, we hope that
company policies are both legal and moral, and we hope that all of our laws are
morally acceptable. This is the ideal we all strive for. But we should keep in
mind that we cannot assume that we or anyone else has reached this ideal. In
any case, since this is a course about morality, we should keep that foremost
in our minds. Morality is primary, and it ought to inform both the legal system
and managerial policy.
a. (b) Even if you are pulling duties off the air, make sure that you are invoking
the widest general duty you can. What I mean is this: if I invoke a duty such as
not using too much salt in my cooking, this is presumably because I have a
wider duty to serve healthy meals. And the duty to serve healthy meals
presumably derives from a wider duty such as not causing unnecessary harm
to others and myself. When invoking a duty, make sure to invoke the widest,
the most inclusive duty--and then explain why that duty prescribes a specific
course of action.
So your explanation should be something like this: the duty not to harm others
unnecessarily means that I should not be cooking meals with too much salt,
because too much salt is unnecessary and harmful to people in the long run.
Finally, do not diminish the complexity of the cases we are dealing with by just
mentioning one duty. When we are dealing with moral problems, in 99% of the cases, we
are dealing with a clash of multiple duties (this, from the perspective of duty theory).
There is more than one duty in the picture and the real difficulty of the case is to
determine which one gains the upper hand. So, mention all the duties that are relevant to
the case and explain which one gets priority and why. Do not ignore the why!
Also, if and when you invoke a duty, make sure to consider all the responsibilities that
duty places on the person in question. So, say you invoke the duty of loyalty when
discussing what a soldier should do in a morally complex situation in war. Let us say her
commander has just told her to torch an enemy village. Here, loyalty places
responsibilities on her not only vis a vis her immediate commander, but also the larger
military institution of which she is a part. Maybe loyalty to the commander would
suggest that she follow the order, but loyalty to the larger military institution would
suggest that she disobey the order as going against the moral code of that institution.
Remember that life is rarely as simple as movies and TV tend to suggest.
Virtue Theory: I expanded on your books treatment of Virtue Theory in the document
called Notes on Virtue Theory in the week 4 folder. What I need to remind you here is
this: just like duty theory, virtue theory suffers from the problem of determining where
virtues come from. Once again, I will let you invoke any virtue you wish, as long as you
follow the policy I outlined in (b) above under Duty Theory. That is, always invoke the
widest virtue possible, and show how it prescribes a specific course of action.
One common mistake in applying Virtue Theory is to forget to invoke any virtues.
People quite often say something like Virtue theory says we should do what a virtuous
person (or, a person who wishes to do the right thing) should do and so they should do
X. But notice that no virtue has been mentioned??"so we have no idea why X should be
done by a virtuous person!
Just as above, do not diminish the complexity of the cases we are dealing with by just
mentioning one virtue--mention all the virtues that are relevant to the case and explain
which one gets priority and why. Do not ignore the why!
Hence make sure you specifically mention the virtues you think are relevant to the case
(such as honesty, courage, etc.), explain which of them gets priority, and also explain what
course of action that virtue prescribes.
Read the last paragraph of the section on Duty Theory, except thinking now in terms of
virtues as opposed to duties. Remember that the same virtue can suggest conflicting
courses of action (just like duties) in the same situation.
(5) Assess the rightness or wrongness of various outcomes
I believe that this step of the CRM confuses people rather than helping them resolve a
moral problem. So I am canceling this step. SKIP STEP 5, but keep the original
numbering of the others steps.
(6) Decide
Keep this short. Just tell me what you have decided to do as concisely as you can.
Try to avoid being too wishy-washy here. For example, the authors prescription for
Abdul on page 156 of your textbook is too wishy-washy. They say Abdul should look
for some creative way to educate the clients. What creative way? Can you imagine a
general giving an order that goes Find a creative way to flank the enemy!? Or a
cookbook that says and then find a creative way to put all the ingredients together?
So please try to be much more precise in your prescriptions. For example, Abdul should
mistakenly forward to the client some links to newspaper articles about security problems
of firms that tried to cut too many corners. By doing this, he can further inform the
owners of the risk they are taking without appearing to do so.
(7) Defend
This is where you defend your decision. You try to come up with all the morally relevant
reasons for choosing the way you did. You can appeal to the prescriptions of the theories
you applied in step four, you can appeal to other moral reasons or values you hold. If you
happen to be taken by one of the theories discussed in the textbook, including the ones
you applied, feel free to say that you are adopting theory X, and for that reason you
would abide by its prescription. In other words, if while applying the three theories
in step 4, you fall in love with one of them, you can give priority to its support
(while bringing in other support as well). If you have decided on a course of action
prescribed by none of the theories, please make sure that you explain which moral value(s)
influence your decision.
(8) REFLECT
In this step, whatever else you do, do not forget to consider possible objections to your
chosen course of action (the decision you described in step 6). This means (a) stepping
into the shoes of a potential critic and trying to find the biggest problem with your
decision, and (b) stepping back into your own shoes and trying to find a response to that
criticism.
Performing the mental shift described in (b) will be the very difficult for most of you.
It requires you to step out of your own shoes and to step into the shoes of the opposing
viewpoint, so to speak. You are then supposed to attempt to undermine your own
position by finding the weakest point in it. This is not something most of us are used to
do in te daily course of our lives; but it is a crucial component of critical thinking and
intellectual honesty. Sometimes, it enables us to strengthen our position (by finding a
response to the objection, as requested in (b) )??"sometimes, it shows us that we have
been holding an untenable position and hence enables us to avoid a mistake.
Please make sure you are not presenting objections that are transparently faulty (and
hence easy to answer). If you are capable of easily detecting a problem with what you give
as an objection, this means that you can most probably devise an improved objection that
avoids such transparent mistakes.
Here is a short example to illustrate: (In the example, I am not trying to make the
arguments flawless??"that is not the point. The point is to illustrate the argumentobjection-
response structure I describe above):
I decided in step 6 that Miss Jones should apologize to her subordinate.
{This is your decision. Now we change shoes and start (a)}
One might object to this as follows: if a person of higher rank apologizes to a subordinate, this is
tantamount to losing all credibility and workplace discipline. If Ms. Jones apologizes, she will
lose all her effectiveness.
{In the next paragraph, I step back into my shoes and respond to the objection??"this
is (b)}
This objection is based on a simplistic view of human psychology. If a higher-ranking official has
made a mistake, apologizing for the mistake does not make her lose credibility, it increases her
credibility! As long as such mistakes do not abound, she will be seen as a more credible and just
administrator for recognizing and facing up to her own mistakes. Instead, failing to apologize
multiplies her mistakes!
This example should give you a clear indication of what I am looking for in step 8.
Good luck!
There are faxes for this order.

This paper is for a Religion course on sacred Christian stories.

Three early Christian texts:

1. The LIFE OF ADAM AND EVE (in two versions, the Greek "Apolcalypse" and the Latin "Vita", written between the second and fourth centuries AD.

2. Ephrem the Syrian''s COMMENTARY ON GENESIS 2-3. Ephrem was born around 300 AD in the Persian city of Nisibis, and died in 373 in the Roman Syrian city of Edessa. He wrote in a language called Syriac.

3. Augustine''s CITY OF GOD, Book 14, chapters 10-14; this passage is a discussion of Genesis 2-3. Augustine was a Bishop in the North African city of Hippo Regius; he wrote the City of God early in teh fifth century AD, around 413. He wrote in Latin.

PICK TWO OUT OF THESE THREE TEXTS, and discuss how they elaborate on the biblical narrative of Genesis 2-3. If you pick the Life of Adam and Eve as one text, choose ONE of the two versions. Note that these are three different types of texts. The Life of Adam and Eve is a narrative that continues the story of Adam and Eve after they are expelled from Eden. Ephrem''s commentary tries to
explicate the meaning of Genesis 2-3 by speculating about the gaps in the biblical account, but not going past the story as Genesis has it. Augustine''s discussion attempts to analyze how human psychology could be so flawed as to choose to disobey God. The Life of Adam and Eve is a story - an imaginative account. Ephrem and Augustine include some story-like elements when they
discuss Genesis 2-3, because they suggest what Adam and Eve might have been thinking or feeling.

How does each text portray Adam and Eve? What kind of relationship do Adam and Eve have with each other? What kind of relationship do they have with God? What motivates each character? In the Life of Adam and Eve, what kind of life do Adam and Eve have after they are expelled from Paradise? Do these texts soften the tragic account of Genesis 3 or render it a harsher story? What is each writer''s attitude towards the biblical text of Genesis 2-3?

You must give citations each time you refer to a specific point in the text, or each time you quote. You may give citations in footnotes, endnotes, or in parentheses in your text. Either in the first footnote or at the end of your paper, you should indicate which version of the Bible you are using.

end of assignment.

If you can locate these three texts, that is wonderful. I have these three articles in a coursepacket for this particular class along with Genesis 2-3. However, I do not know if and when I can locate fax machine. I think Augustine''s City of God will be easy to find and of course the Bible isn''t hard to track down. The other two I''m not sure about. I will try to fax these materials to you ASAP, but if you can start the paper before this happens, that would be wonderful (as it is due today).

Thank you very much!
There are faxes for this order.

"Blakc No More" by George Schuyler

Develop a thesis that analyzes Max Disher's Faustian Journey as a way of rendering race as a polymorphous cultural invention, a segregating marketing tool, and a potent opiate wrought with gross mythologies, flagrant contradictions, and grotesque pseudo-science. Or write a comparison essay in which you show the parallels between Max Disher's self- destructiveness and that of the dubious entrepreneurial dreamer in "The Great Gatsby".




(these are note that I took in the class)
Lexicon for Max
1. crisis
2. hypocricy
3. confusion
4. misguided freedom
5. ignorance of human psychology
6. quest for the bitch goddes (p.20)
7. pseudo self
8. disenchantment
9. self-hatred selfs
10. myth of racial pority



(would you write essay more like student please because last time my teacher doubted me...my teacher said essay was kind of too professional....thank you)

Psychology Thought Paper for College Freshman. Compare and contrast the various personality theories. (Psychodynamic Theory, Freud's Theory of Personality, Humanistic Theory, B.F. Skinner's Theory of Personality, Social Learning Theory, Evolutionary Personality Theory) It has to be double-space, 12 pt font & 3 full pages.

Human Development Video Analysis.

I would like to use the movie "Forest Gump" and examine the character(s) in regards to the list that I am faxing to you.

I will need 6 pages of text and I will personally take care of title page. I also will need Reference page in APA format.

If you have any questions please email.
There are faxes for this order.

Human and Machine Intelligence Essay

Write a 280 - 350 word paper in which you compare and contrast the fundamental similarities and differences between human and machine intelligence using your selected philosophical approach. Develop your own criteria for identifying a thinking machine.

One peer-reviewed sources and of the assigned readings MUST be included among your research sources.

Psychology: environmental psychology
Architecture and the Environment Paper Prepare a 1,400-word paper in which you explore human response to physical structure. As a part of your paper be sure to address the following:

? Describe how physical structure affects human behavior.
? Analyze architecture as a means of controlling human behavior.
? Describe the environmental psychological implications of commercial and residential design, including purpose and considerations.
? Analyze the importance of architectural development supporting sustainable development.

Include at least three references from peer-reviewed sources.
Format your paper consistent with APA guidelines.
please include a short intro and conclusion

Human Aggression

Two questions in the study of human aggression have been, what is it and why do people do it? In this assignment, you will have the opportunity to observe people involved in aggressive behavior and examine their motives.

Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:


a) Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines.

.

- Watch the YouTube video on the Stanford Prison Experiment located at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmwSC5fS40w

- An optional YouTube video to watch is located at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsFEV35tWsg

- In a paper of 2,000- words, provide a theory why the "prison guards" behaved in an aggressive manner towards the "prisoners" in the Stanford Prison Experiment.

- In your theory, account for the following:

a) Situational forces within the experiment that caused the "guards" to act aggressively.

b) Cultural pressures within the group.

c) Stereotyping issues.

d) Aggressive persona within the "guards."

e) Since the "guards" were allowed to come and go from the experiment, potential outside forces that exerted influence on their behavior.

f) Why the guards did not act in an altruistic manner.

References

Cohen, D., Nisbett, R. E., Bowdle, B. F., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Insult, aggression, and the southern culture of honor: An "experimental ethnography." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 945-960. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.5.945

Stanford Prison Experiment. (n.d.). YouTube. Available at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmwSC5fS40w

Human Nature

Thesis: Although it is imperfect, human nature is an essential part of man. Throughout time many philosophers and religious scholars have debated its value to individuals and its impact on society. Is human nature fundamentally good? Is human nature innate or learned? This essay will examine these questions as they relate to Confucianism, Xunzi?s philosophy, Mencius? philosophy, and Christian beliefs. A brief summary for each perspective?s opinion on human nature will be provided. In addition to these summaries, I will compare and contrast these points of view. Finally, I will evaluate which philosophy of human nature I believe to have the most merit omitting Christianity. This omission is necessary due to the personal bias it poses.



Bibliography:
Ames, Roger T., and Henry Rosemont, Jr., trans. The Analects of Confucius: A Philosophical Translation. A New Translation Based on the Dingzhou Fragments and Other Recent Archaeological Finds. Classics of Ancient China. New York: Ballantine, 1998.

Cua, Antonio S. Human Nature, Ritual, and History: Studies in Xunzi and Chinese Philosophy. Studies in Philosophy and the History of Philosophy 43. Washington: Catholic University of America Press, 2005.

Holy Bible. Web. .

Ivanhoe, Philip J., and Bryan W. Van Norden. Mozi, in Readings in Classical Chinese Philosophy, ed. Indianapolis: Hackett, 2001, 55-107.

Machle, Edward J. Nature and Heaven in the Xunzi: A Study of the Tian lun. SUNY Series in Chinese Philosophy and Culture. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993.

Van Norden, Bryan. The Essential Mengzi: Selected Passages with Traditional Commentary. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 2009.

NOTE:

Evidence:

Support your argument with evidence (especially textual evidence from primary sources).
Be sure that your evidence is reliable and relevant to your thesis (and vice versa).
Do not just cite your evidence and expect it to speak for itself. All evidence should be analyzed.

Sources:

Papers are expected to be the result of substantial independent research, involving both primary and secondary sources.

HUMAN EXPERIMANTATION IN HISTORY

DIRECTIONS:

? HAS TO INVOLVE HUMAN SUBJECTS
? DEFINE PURPOSE OF STUDY
? IDENTIFY THE ETHICAL ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH STUDY
? 2 PAGE MLA FORMAT

FOLOWING QUESTIONS HAVE TO BE ANSWERED IN PAPER

? WHAT WAS THE STUDY TRYING TO PROVE
? WHO CONDUCTED THE STUDY HOW MANY SUBJECTS WERE AFFECTED
? WAS THE STUDY ILLEGAL OR UNETHICAL
? WHAT MADE THE STUDY UNETHICAL
? HOW WAS THE PARTICIPANTS HARMED BY THE STUDY
? WHAT LAWS OR REGULATIONS WERE IMPLEMENTED AS A RESULT
? DID THE ENDS JUSTIFTY THE MEANS

Psychology 101-1901 Professor Graff- Abstract This paper explores the work and contribution of Sigmond Freud to the science and art of modern psychology. His frame is based on expanding man knowledge of himself,and the systematic forces. Determining the inner mental human behavior. fREUD DEMONSTRATES THAT HYSTERICAL SYSTEM COULD consistently be traced to highly emotional experience which had been repressed, excluded from conscious memory,virually every aspect of human behavior: slip of the tongue and simple error"s in memory, furthermore offer a method though which the individual could uncover the root sources of dysfunction, and ideally heal it, becoming freer to make better more satisfing choiceds, freud"s work introduced and populaized a number of techniques that are still in use today,his most enduring contribution has been the use of talk therapy and the notion of the unconscious,must rework this abstract into the introduction of this research paper,5 references 3 book and 2 web the author text year page 4-6 pages long not including bibliography and foot note page-APA required all pages this is two parts Abstract and final research paper.proper spelling and grammer. can you help me need it by next week if you can thank you if you cannot thinks anyway.

Millie Crowder
Kind Regards

Psychology 100 Paper Assignment #2: Film Analysis DUE: 11/21/04
Read all of these instructions carefully....
***************************************************************************************************
Your assignment is to watch one of the ten films listed below, then write a 4- to 6-page paper describing how two psychological concepts or theories are involved in the film. Start by choosing a film. We have listed the possibilities below, along with a list of some psychological concepts and theories addressed in each film (in parentheses). You?ll need to write about two such concepts (you might identify additional concepts that we have not thought of). Note: The film descriptions below are taken directly from (or adapted from) AThe Internet Movie Database,@ a film resource located at: http://www.imdb.com. At that website, you can find the author of each of these blurbs, as well as movie reviews.

1. As Good as it Gets (obsessive compulsive disorder, prejudice & homophobia, love and attraction). The trials and tribulations of a cranky, bigoted, obsessive-compulsive writer, Melvin Udall (Jack Nicholson). After his gay neighbor (Greg Kinnear) is brutally beaten, Udall is entrusted with the care of the neighbor's dog, and he has a difficult relationship with a waitress (Helen Hunt) to add on top of that. What develops is a weekend trip/triangle between these three individuals, and together they learn the true meaning of "the sunny side of life."

2. A Beautiful Mind (schizophrenia, paranoia, intelligence, social relationships: ostracism, love and attraction). This is a biography based on the true life of John Forbes Nash Jr., a math prodigy able to solve problems that baffled the greatest of minds. He made an astonishing discovery early in his career and stood on the brink of international acclaim. But the handsome and arrogant Nash soon found himself on a painful and harrowing journey of self-discovery B he suffered from schizophrenia. After many years of struggle, he eventually triumphed over his tragedy, and finally - late in life - received the Nobel Prize.

3. Remember the Titans (racism, prejudice, discrimination, contact hypothesis, leadership). Even as late as 1971, Virginia schools were still segregated. In an actual event, one Black and one White high school was closed and the students were all sent to T.C. Williams High School under a federal mandate to integrate. The year is seen through the eyes of the football team. The man hired to coach the Black school is made head coach over the highly successful white coach. The team becomes the unifying symbol for the community as the boys and the adults learn to depend on and trust each other.

4. Stevie (child physical and sexual abuse, the impact of economic deprivation on child development, crime: rehabilitation versus punishment). Directed by Steve James of Oak Park, Illinois, who also directed Hoop Dreams. In 1995, James returned to rural Southern Illinois to reconnect with Stevie Fielding, a troubled young boy he had been a 'Big Brother' to ten years earlier. He began a film and a search to discover not only what had happened to Stevie over the past ten years but to understand the forces that had shaped his entire life. Part way through the filming, Stevie is arrested and charged with a serious crime that tears his family apart. What was to be a modest profile turns into an intimate four and half year chronicle of Stevie, his broken family, the criminal justice system and the filmmaker himself, as they all struggle with who Stevie has become.


5. Memento (memory loss, mnemonics, grief). Leonard (Guy Pearce) is an insurance investigator, whose memory has been damaged following a head injury he sustained during his wife's murder. He can no longer form new memories. His quality of life has been severely hampered after this event, and he can now only live life by tattooing notes on himself and taking pictures of things with a Polaroid camera. The movie is told in forward flashes of future events that compensate for his unreliable memory, during which he has liaisons with various complex characters. Leonard badly wants revenge for his wife's murder, but, as numerous characters explain, there may be little point if he won't remember it.

6. One Flew Over the Cuckoo=s Nest (clinical disorders, treatment of the mentally ill, social and clinical construction of psychological disorder). McMurphy has been dating a fifteen-year-old and is convicted for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Rather than spend his time in jail, he convinces the guards that he's crazy enough to need psychiatric care and is sent to a hospital. He fits in frighteningly well, and his different point of view actually begins to cause some of the patients to progress. Nurse Ratched becomes his personal cross to bear as he resists the hospital routine.

7. Rain Man (autism, dealing with mentally ill family members). Charley is a hustler who uses people. He finds that the father who threw him out as a teenager has died and left him an antique convertible and something more important, a previously unknown brother, Raymond. Raymond is an autistic Asavant,@ disabled in many ways, but able to calculate complicated mathematical problems in his head with great speed and accuracy. Their father has left his fortune to Raymond who doesn't even understand what money is for. Charley is enraged by what has happened and by his father keeping Raymond's existence from him for his entire life. He kidnaps Raymond and the two begin a long road trip that will lead them to an understanding of each other.

8. The Other Sister (intellectual disability/mental retardation, community assistance). When Carla Tate, now a young woman, is 'graduated' out of the training school where she has resided for many years because she is mentally challenged, her hope is that she will be accepted for all that she can now do for herself. But Carla's family is wealthy which permits her mother, already blinded to her daughter's rather high-functioning abilities, to try and provide for Carla beyond her needs or desires, bringing forth the inevitable confrontations. What Carla may lack in mental ability she certainly makes up for in her insistence on being independent, even living in her own apartment. But if this isn't enough, into the mix comes a young man, equally challenged mentally, who moves Carla beyond anyone's control.

9. Schindler's List (racism, religious intolerance, obedience, helping and altruism). Oskar Schindler is a vain, glorious and greedy German businessman who becomes unlikely humanitarian amid the barbaric Nazi reign when he feels compelled to turn his factory into a refuge for Jews. Based on the true story of Oskar Schindler who, at great risk, managed to save about 1100 Jews from being gassed at the Auschwitz concentration camp. A story of good and evil.


10. Ticket to Heaven (cults, conformity, social influence, obedience to authority, leadership, religion, attitude change, persuasion). After his girlfriend of many years leaves him, David participates in a summer camp in the country. He doesn't realize that it's a training camp for a fanatic religious sect. He can't resist the pressure of permanent group sessions, denial of sleep and food for long, and he becomes a willing slave of the organization. Their "father's" motto is: "Stay up, earn money, destroy the Satan!" - Satan, that's everyone who's against the sect. Members are shown how to kill themselves in case their parent kidnap them. When David's old friend Larry finds him in the camp, he can't believe how much he's changed. He works out a plan to free him and give him back his brain.

Writing the paper:
Your paper must be a clear, logical, grammatically correct essay in which you demonstrate your understanding of two psychological concepts and theories by applying them to explain events or characters or actions in the movie. (You can discuss more than two if you like, but two must be discussed in detail as per instructions below). You need to show us that you understand the two psychological theories or concepts, and you must discuss how they are portrayed correctly or incorrectly in the film and/or how you could apply the concept or theory to explain something about the film.
Your paper should take the form given below. Use these exact headings in your paper, plus any other subheadings that you think help clarify your text (headings and subheadings help organize your paper). When we grade your paper, we will assess points for each of these sections.

I. Introduction
Brief statement of the topic of your film and a brief introduction of the 2 or more psychological concepts that you will discuss in relation to the film.

II. Plot review
Brief review of the film=s plot in general. This should focus on only the aspects of the film that a naive reader (someone who has not seen the film) would need to understand before he or she reads your analysis of how the psychological concepts or theories are illustrated in the movie. This need not be long: The point of this paper is to showcase your ability to understand and apply psychological concepts B not to showcase your movie review skills.

III. Psychological concept #1.
A. Describe one specific psychological issue or concept that is illustrated in the film or one theory that you will use to explain something in the film. Give a very detailed explanation/definition of the concept or theory using your textbook, the Annual Editions reader, and/or lecture notes. (Don=t simply label a behavior or event in the film, describe the issue or concept or theory in detail.) This must be in your own words B absolutely no quoting directly from outside sources (although you may quote from dialogue in the film). You may discuss information from outside sources if you want, but those sources must be properly cited. Your explanation of the concept must be so clear that someone who has never had a class in psychology would be able to understand the concept.


B. Describe exactly how that concept is illustrated in the film or how the theory can be applied to understand something in the film. You can apply theories or concepts to characters, events, etc. Describe exactly how the film did or did not illustrate the psychological concept or theory accurately. Did the film get it right, or did the filmmaker take Aartistic licence@ in portraying the concept? How was the film accurate, how was it inaccurate in portraying the concept or theory? Are the events or actions in the film consistent with or predicted by psychological theory, or would psychological theory have predicted different outcomes or actions? If a clinical disorder was portrayed in a character, was it portrayed accurately or inaccurately? How? Does this film teach the public correctly about the psychological issue, or not? If you could add a commentary to the end of the film, what would you say to the audience to ensure that they have a scientific understanding of the issue? Be careful to address these questions with solid scientific evidence about the concept or theory B do not use your own personal experiences or opinions, if your opinions are not based on scientific evidence.
[Note: This section will be the longest part of your paper, because it is the most important part (and will therefore count the most points). This is where you give your scientific but creative analysis of the film using what you have learned in this course.]

IV. Psychological concept #2.
[Repeat A & B above for the second concept or theory.]

V. Conclusion
A. Wrap up your paper with a few sentences that tie everything together and reiterate the main one or two points you wanted to make in this paper.

VI. Reference page
Cite all the sources you consulted. See Writing Tips for format.

The Specific Format and Style for Your Paper

You need to use the basics of American Psychological Association format when you type your paper. This refers to a standardized method for organizing your paper and for writing and reference style (from the APA Publication Manual). It is not necessary to get that manual, because we have listed the most important points below, and we have posted an example paper on the Blackboard site. Your paper must be 4 - 6 double-spaced, single-sided pages with 1" margins and 12 point font. Your paper must be stapled--one staple in the top left corner. The paper must conform to the rules in your Writing Tips handout and herein. The title page and reference page do not count in the 4 - 6 page total. Your paper must include a title page, a running head, and a reference section. Each of these is described below.

1. Title Page: The title page is double spaced, as is everything in the rest of your paper. Your title should appear approximately two-thirds of the page up from the bottom. Your name should be directly under this. Both the title and your name are centered, neither is underlined. At the top of the page, on the first line of the page, type the following phrase flush against the left margin: Running head: A Few Significant Words of Your Title (see below). At the bottom of the page, add your TA's name and the time and day of your section.
2. Running Head: The running head is the first few words of your title. You already put this at the top of your title page (see above). You put it there to alert the reader to expect it on every page of the paper. Specifically, it goes at the top right hand corner of every page, with the page number directly to the right.
3. Main Text: The main text needs to be 4 - 6 full pages long (this excludes references and title page) and it should follow the outline described above. The body of your paper needs to be double-spaced, and left justified. Do not center the entire paper and do not use right justification. See the writing handout for specifics about writing style, margins, fonts, etc.

4. Giving Credit: As discussed in the writing handout, you must give credit to authors whose ideas or research you reference. It is best to use no direct quotations, period. If you use an idea, you cite the idea like this: Researchers have found that tomatoes grow well in good dirt (Jones, 1983). Many times an article that you refer to will have more than one author. The first time that you refer to an article in text, you cite each author, like this: (Jones, Thomas, & Smith, 1983). Each time you refer to the same article again, you will use an abbreviation of the citation. Specifically, the words "et al." (Latin for "and others") will take the place of every name after the first author in these instances, like this: (Jones et al., 1983). This is not true for articles authored by only two people, like (Jones & Smith, 1993). You cite it like that throughout the paper. Note the use of commas in these examples.
5. Reference Page: The reference page is the last page of your paper. It includes a list of all the articles or books you cited in your paper, but none that you never cited within the text. Every time you reference someone in the body of your paper, the location of that information must appear in the reference section so that those who are interested can find the same information. The reference page begins with the word Reference centered at the top of the page (the word is not underlined). The entire reference page is double spaced like every other section. Each article should be listed in alphabetical order, using the author's last name. See writing handout for specific examples. It is important that you do all underlining, capitalization, and abbreviation correctly.

Psychology regards learning as any relatively permanent change in behavior that is the result of
experience. In textbook chapter 7 Myers focuses on learning by association (otherwise known as
conditioning). In this essay address the following questions: Conditioning is defined as "learning
by association." What is meant by "learning by association?? Classical conditioning and
operant conditioning are both examples of learning by association. Compare and contrast the two
types of conditioning. In what ways are the two processes alike and in what ways are they
different? Discuss how research findings regarding observational learning, cognitive processes,
and biological factors have changed the way we have come to think about conditioning?

Psychology paper 4 pages with sources (5). The subject is to be "How lack of sleep affects memory" with one page to cover how "Narcolepsy" affects memory. The summary of paper to be a strategy to avoid becoming "sleep deprived". The essay to be written in "opinion/arguement" style. Please use 3 sources on the ''lack of sleep vs. memory'' 1 source on narcolepsey and 1 source on strategy.