The Exploration of the Orgasm Essay -- essays research papers

The role of the orgasm in heterosexual relationships is significant in having a satisfying malefemale relationship according to society’s expectations. By using the malefemale binary, as well as exploring the social construction of sex, we can see just how significant the role the orgasm plays in heterosexual relationships. First off, we must understand that orgasms are achieved differently for both males and females.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Male orgasms are achieved through the male sex organ, being the penis. It has many nerve endings that are very sensitive. The female orgasm contains just as many of these nerve ending, but is a much smaller size. The penis is on average 5.5 inches, where the clitoris is about 1 inch. What is interesting is the actual act of sexual penetration in regards to orgasms. This act is perfectly constructed for the male to achieve orgasms, but poorly constructed for the female. The vagina is inches away from the clitoris, and is the primary body part involved in sex. Since the penis is penetrating the vagina, we see how it is easy for it to be fully stimulated and to reach climax. However, the female sex organ receives little if any stimulation depending on the position, which in fact makes it extremely hard for females to reach climax. It is also interesting to note that the act of intercourse itself ends not with the female orgasm, but with the male. Due to the biologica l make-up of males and females, the actual act of sex (penetration) is constructed around the male orgasm.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  When exploring the role of the orgasm, we have to take into consideration complexity of the female orgasm. Society makes up certain stereotypes for males and females in terms of sexual relationships. Here we take into consideration the malefemale binary in terms of sex and emotion. Males are able to separate sex from emotion, where females combine the two. Therefore, the female orgasm is both physical and metal. Some females even go further and say that without both components involved, the female orgasm is extremely hard to achieve unless they are both physically and mentally involved with their male counterpart. This also requires most females to be completely comfortable with their male partner. Society on the other hand finds it acceptable for men to be sexually promiscuous, and this is a key factor for men to be ab... ...ay â€Å"can we try something different, because this is not working for me†. This would then lead to the man feeling very tricked and betrayed, and would be a blow to his ego (because he not masculine according to society unless he can please the woman). Therefore, women should learn to always be honest, and let the man know he makes you feel good whether you orgasm or not, but that there are certain things he can do (oral, sex toys) that can help you achieve orgasm as well.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  In conclusion, we see that through certain social stigma, such as masturbation and oral sex, as well as through the concepts of the male being the gift giver, and the act of penetration focusing on the penis, society gives little importance to the female orgasm. In terms of heterosexual relationships it is important for the female to be open with her partner in informing him of what is needed to increase her sexual pleasure, which will help bring her to orgasm as well. Society has placed a great importance on orgasms in relationships, especially in terms of the male, and as a result we have found ways to ensure this is satisfied through faking it, sex toys, and different sexual acts.

Experiencing Salvation in as I Lay Dying

Experiencing Salvation in As I Lay Dying ENGLISH 215 October 31, 2011 William Faulkner’s As I Lay Dying centers on the absurd journey that the Bundren family takes to Jefferson to bury their dead mother, Addie. Faulkner frames this journey through the lens of various narrators with a specific focus on the characters’ innermost thoughts and deep interior monologues. Although the novel’s plot revolves around the Bundren family, characters outside of the family are essential to provide an objective view. Without these outside characters, much of Faulkner’s commentary would be lost.One of the most important characters outside of the Bundren family is Cora Tull. It is through her character that Faulkner makes his most potent commentary on the ideas of sin, salvation, and hypocrisy. With the strong irony that is employed throughout the novel, Faulkner twists Cora’s seemingly ideal moral character and uses her instead as an example of what not to be. Throu gh the juxtaposition of Addie and Cora, Faulkner seeks to highlight religious hypocrisy and show that Cora’s idea of religious salvation is faulty.Instead, Faulkner believes (as demonstrated through Addie) that true salvation consists of an enlightened state of self-awareness and concrete understanding of one’s own sin. Religion is echoed in every facet of Cora’s life. On the surface, she appears to be a warm-hearted Christian spirit, but it becomes quickly evident that Cora’s perception of religion is skewed. Cora is always seen serving her neighbors but Cora’s charity is not genuine. She serves not out of love, but to keep up a Christian appearance and receive a promised heavenly reward (23, 93).When Cora attempts to serve, even her husband (Vernon Tull) comments that she tries to â€Å"crowd the other folks away and get in closer than anybody else (71). †She is very concerned with the eternal state of others around her, but again, her con cern is not out of love. Cora states that only God can see into the heart (167), but in her piety Cora criticizes others and believes that they will only be saved if they adopt her works based religion.Cora’s life experiences have only increased her desire to serve more dutifully because she has earned the respect of others in the community. In this ironic way, Cora’s hypocrisy has served her well on this earth. In contrast, Addie’s life experiences have molded her into a defiant, unfulfilled and bitter woman. Through Cora’s eyes, Addie is a bad mother and is in desperate need of repentance. Cora believes that Addie is blind to her own sin and that it is sacrilegious to trust in Jewel instead of turning to God for salvation.However, it is Cora that cannot see and passes judgment blindly. Cora does not know the implications behind Addie’s favoritism to Jewel and that the man Cora has placed on such a holy pedestal (Minister Whitfield) is in fact a s ource of Addie’s sin. Cora does not know that it was Minister Whitfield that wanted to cover up the affair and that Addie’s consent to remain quiet were out of love for the brief satisfaction she had found in him – Addie has always remained genuine; she had no desire to be deceitful.Cora’s misinformed judgments are full of words that â€Å"go straight up in a thin line, quick and harmless (173). † In Addie’s section in the novel, she describes the scene where Cora wants Addie to pray with her to receive a salvation (168, 174). The reason Cora thought that Addie could receive salvation by saying a prayer is because Cora’s religion is empty, full of mindless words and â€Å"people to whom sin is just a matter of words, to them salvation is just words too (176). Cora’s word-oriented religious hypocrisy is a direct manifestation of Addie’s idea that words lack meaning and are just â€Å"shape(s) to fill a lack (172). † In distinguishing the differences between Addie and Cora, it is made clear who can ultimately experience salvation. Even though pious Cora may have experienced some worldly success, Faulkner is suggesting that she will never obtain salvation because she is blinded in her hypocrisy and is consumed with duty and a works-based religion. Cora knows sin as it can be expressed in words but not in practice.Addie knows the extent of sin because (unlike Cora) she has truly experienced it. Even though Addie expresses discontent, she is at least aware of her sin and its relationship to the nature of her being. Faulkner criticizes Cora’s judgmental, insincere, and pious character and instead presents Addie’s self-aware, authentic, and pragmatic understanding as the way to experience sanctification in this life. It is Addie, not Cora, who will receive the reward of true enlightenment and salvation.

Assess the Role of Faith in Supporting Religious Belief Essay

In 1877, William Kingdon Clifford propositioned in his book â€Å"Ethics and Belief† that belief in something without sufficient evidence is irrational. Whilst he accepted that in many beliefs there is often an epistemic gap between the evidence and the conclusion (inductive reasoning) he did also claim that â€Å"It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.† Furthermore he claimed that that tolerating credulity (a tendency to believe readily) and superstition will damage ultimately society. He concurred with David Hume (1711-76) when he said â€Å"All wise men proportion their belief to the evidence.† This stance – that belief without sufficient evidence is irrational – is called evidentialism, and is adopted by many atheists (including Clifford and Hume) in their view of theology. However, natural theology instead attempts to meet evidentialism on its own terms by trying to show that belief in God is actually rational. It draws collectively upon all of the a posteriori arguments for God’s existence including the teleological, cosmological, moral and experiential arguments. However, it is rare that an atheist will be convinced by the evidence of these arguments anywhere beyond the point of agnosticism. It is generally accepted that belief in God requires some element of seemingly irrational faith. Indeed, the stance of fideism states that reason plays no part in belief. â€Å"Whoever attempts to demonstrate the existence of God†¦is an excellent subject for a comedy of higher lunacy.† – Soren Kierkegaard. Moderate fideists suggest that reason can actually be destructive to one’s faith. They claim that reason leads to arrogance by encouraging the idea that human reason alone will suffice and that God unnecessary for moral or spiritual direction. Whilst moderate theists view reason as a barrier to true faith however, (thus disregarding natural theology as irrelevant) extreme theists go so far as to agree with Tertullian when he said (AD 155-222) â€Å"Credo quia absurdum est.† or â€Å"I believe because it is absurd.† Aquinas (1225-74) claimed that there were two ways in which to know God. The first is through natural theology, including his five a posteriori proofs constructed by human reason. The second is through â€Å"revealed theology† which cannot be found by human reason alone, but must involve divine intervention or revelation. The acceptance of these revealed truths requires faith, and this is fundamental to the Christian religion. For example, only faith can reveal the truth behind the statement â€Å"God is the father, the son and the Holy Ghost† or that â€Å"the bread of communion is the body of Christ†. Thus revelation provides us with a body of truths, which must be taken on faith alone. Aquinas claims that faith is a combination of reason and opinion. It involves reason since it is propositional i.e. claims certain beliefs to be true and therefore similar to scientific knowledge. On the other hand these truths cannot be proved, and so involve an epistemic gap. It is this epistemic gap that makes faith a matter of opinion and so allows humanity free will over their belief. The stance that it is our choice whether or not to take a leap of faith was also held by Soren Kierkegaard (1812-1855). Alvin Plantinga (1932-) proposed that the classical foundationalism upon which evidentialism is based is flawed. Foundationalist beliefs are described by Plantinga as â€Å"the starting points for thought† and he summarises their definition as: â€Å"I am entitled to believe X without any evidence if and only if it is self-evident, incorrigible or certain to me in some way†. He argues that this is flawed, since this statement is itself neither self-evident, incorrigible nor is it certain in some way. It appears therefore that foundationalism defines itself as irrational. He also states that there are many beliefs that can be held rationally, but that do not fall under the foundationalist criteria or that can be justified contingently. For example, the trust we have in our memory, or the belief that other people have minds of their own. Plantinga argues that we must ultimately reject classical foundationalism on the grounds that it is incoherent, and also because it rejects many beliefs that common sense tells us to be properly basic. He propositions that his reformed epistemology should take the place of classical foundationalism, and because of this: â€Å"It is entirely right, rational, reasonable and proper to believe in God without any evidence at all.† A theist might claim that it just appears obvious to them that God exists, and for Plantinga this is good enough. However, surely this would mean that anything we like can be a properly basic belief? Could a child’s belief in Santa Clause not be defined as properly basic? Plantinga would respond by saying that it is the beliefs directly connected to God’s existence that are properly basic, rather than the belief in God’s existence itself. For example, the guilt felt after committing a bad deed or the sense that something must have cre ated and designed the universe. Blaisà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ Pascal (1623-1662) deemed that it was reasonable to have faith in God by a sheer act of will, so certain was he that he put forward a wager: â€Å"Let us weigh the gain and loss in wagering that God is (exists)†¦If you gain, you gain all, if you lose, you lose nothing.† By this, he meant that the theist stands the chance of gaining entrance to heaven at the risk of nothing, whilst the atheist however risks damnation to hell. However, surely this basis of self-gain is at odds with the teachings of the Christian church? W.K.Clifford suggested that God would deny heaven to those who followed Pascal’s wager on the basis that faith should be founded upon trust and morality, not self gain. Pascal might have responded that true belief would arise from the habit of religion i.e. baptism, mass, prayer etc. However, this is contradicted somewhat by his opinion that one’s relationship with God should be somewhat deeper. â€Å"It is the heart which pe rceives God and not reason.† Furthermore, Pascal’s definition of faith appears to ignore the recognition of God’s immanence and His affect on our everyday lives. William James (1842-1910) found Pascal’s proposition that we can change our beliefs by an act of will entirely ridiculous. He claimed solidly that our beliefs are contingent i.e. each new belief is connected to the previous one. He does agree however that it is rational to sustain a belief even without sufficient evidence given certain circumstances. The first circumstance is where the evidence is indeterminate between two beliefs i.e. favours neither option. The second circumstance is if we are faced with a genuine option i.e. one that is living, forced and momentous. By living James means one that is a reality, as opposed to a dead option, that whilst theoretically possible, isn’t actually going to happen e.g. a devout Catholic supporting the gay pride movement. A forced option is one that cannot be avoided, e.g. choosing whether to go to school or to have a lie in when your alarm goes off at 7:30. A momentous option is one that is unique and irreversible e.g. joining the army – as opposed to a trivial option which is reversible and one that happens regularly throughout life. James states that it is therefore sometimes rational to believe in God without sufficient evidence if the choice is a genuine option. He disputes Pascal’s wager as necessarily being a genuine option as it is not necessarily forced (one could deny the possibility of going to hell) nor is it necessarily living (one might be a devout follower of a different religion). However, he does accept that for a person who perceives the evidence as indeterminate and is already open to belief in God, Pascal’s wager might succeed in tipping the scales and getting them to make that leap of faith. James does believe however that faith can in some instances be a genuine option, and a decision that involves seizing the opportunity and taking a risk. He states that when faced with a genuine option and without sufficient evidence, making a decision will then reveal the evidence to us. For example, one cannot be sure of a stranger’s kindness until they have decided to trust the stranger and give them a chance. Similarly, by making a leap of faith in God, the definitive truth will be later revealed by eschatological verification. However, natural theologians such as Aquinas would certainly dispute James’ claim that the evidence is indeterminate, for the cosmological, teleological, moral and experiential arguments – whilst inconclusive – can be extremely persuasive. Furthermore, like Pascal, he seems to ignore faith as an acceptation of God’s immanence and active presence in our lives. The version of faith held by Aquinas, Plantinga, Pascal and James is propositional in that they all claim that faith about believes in God’s objective existence. However, faith can also be seen existentially as an attitude incorporating God subjectively into the believer’s life. For instance, when I say â€Å"I believe that murder is wrong† or â€Å"I believe in free speech† I am not stating anything about existence, but rather about my commitment towards certain values. H.H.Price (1899-1985) claimed that the statement â€Å"I believe in God† is similar to this in that it is a way of perceiving the world using certain values. â€Å"to see oneself as a created, dependent creature, receiving life and well being from a higher source†¦the only appropriate attitude is one of grateful worship and obedience.† – John Hick. To conclude; each of the arguments examined above vary in their relationship with reason, but what they all have in common is that faith is central to the believer and must work independently of reason to some degree. Some of the arguments incorporate reason, some reject it entirely, but the transcendent nature of God can never be proved, can never be indubitable, for faith is an integral part of religion. Perhaps then natural theology is not trying to prove God’s existence to the point where faith is cast out and certainty resides in its place, but rather it is merely trying to explore God’s nature. â€Å"I do not seek to understand so that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand† – St. Anselm (1033-1109) Proslogian 1. Natural theology could therefore be seen as an expression of faith, rather than a foundation for it. The majority of theists argue that faith is necessary, for if God proved himself to us, we would no longer have free will over our belief and so would be robots without dignity. On the other hand, surely God in His omnipotence could find some way of maintaining our freedom whilst simultaneously providing us certainty of his love? Why not give certainty to the millions of His helpless and suffering children who have lost faith; for where is their dignity?

Research Paper on William James and Functionalism

PSY 101 4/7/13 â€Å"William James and Functionalism† I. Introduction William James (January 11, 1842 – August 26, 1910) was an American philosopher and psychologist who had trained as a physician. He was the first educator to offer a psychology course in the United States. James wrote influential books on pragmatism, psychology, educational psychology, the psychology of religious experience, and mysticism. He was the brother of novelist Henry James and of diarist Alice James. In the summer of 1878, William James married Alice Gibbens. William James was born at the Astor House in New York City.He was the son of Henry James Sr. , a noted and independently wealthy theologian well acquainted with the literary and intellectual elites of his day. The intellectual brilliance of the James family milieu and the remarkable epistolary talents of several of its members have made them a subject of continuing interest to historians, biographers, and critics. James also worked on man y theories included functionalism which is the second paradigm in Psychology. According to William James, functionalism assumed that the human mind served an adaptive role.It explored the function of thoughts and behaviors. II. What is functionalism in Psychology? Functionalism is a theory of the mind in contemporary psychology, developed largely as an alternative to both the identity theory of mind and behaviorism. This theory is built on the premise that human mental states (beliefs, desires, pain, etc. ) are constituted solely by their functional role — that is, they are causal relations to other mental states, sensory inputs, and behavioral outputs . Functionalism is a theoretical level between physical implementation and behavioral output.Therefore, it is different from its predecessors of Cartesian dualism (advocating discrete mental and physical substances) and Skinnerian behaviorism and physicalism (declaring only physical substances): It is only concerned with the ef fective functions of the brain. Since mental states are identified by a functional role, they are said to be realized on multiple levels. In other words, they are able to be manifested in various systems as long as the system performs the appropriate functions. While computers are physical devices with electronic substrate that perform omputations on inputs to give outputs, our brains also act as physical devices with neural substrate that perform computations on inputs which produce behaviors. â€Å"The Principles of Psychology† is a monumental text in the history of psychology, written by William James and published in 1890. James's psychology included four methods: analysis (i. e. , the logical criticism of precursor and contemporary views of the mind), introspection (i. e. , the psychologist's study of his own states of mind), experiment (e. g. , in hypnosis or neurology), and comparison (i. . , the use of statistical means to distinguish norms from anomalies). III. The p aradigm of functionalism The subject matter of psychology: Psychology is the study of mental activity (e. g. perception, memory, imagination, feeling, judgment). Mental activity is to be evaluated in terms of how it serves the organism in adapting to its environment. The methods of psychology: Mental acts can be studied through introspection, the use of instruments to record and measure; and objective manifestations of mind, through the study of its reations and products, and through the study of anatomy and physiology. The functionalists tended to use the term ‘function' rather loosely. The term is used in at least two different ways. It can refer to the study of how a mental process operates. This is a major departure from the study of the structure of a mental process, the difference between stopping a train to tear it apart to study its parts (structuralism), and looking at how the systems interact while it is running (functionalism). The term ‘function' can also ref er to how the mental process functions in the volution of the species, what adaptive property it provides that would cause it to be selected through evolution. Functionalism never really died, it became part of the mainstream of psychology. The importance of looking at process rather than structure is a common attribute of modern psychology. As an individual approach it lacked a clear formulation and inherited the problems of the structuralist reliance on introspection. IV. William James’ approach on functionalism Unlike Many Psychologist who were interested on structuralism (structures of the mind), WilliamJames instead was interested in consciousness and how it functions in individuals, especially in relation to behavior. James’s psychology experiments with his students tended to be more curious adventures in consciousness and practical application. James taught at Harvard University from 1878-1890. During this time, he completed his renowned psychological work: â₠¬Å"The Principles of Psychology† in which he elucidated his functionalist insight into such subjects as consciousness, habit, and emotion. He was also became over saturated with the subject of functionalism and psychologyV. Functionalism vs. Structuralism As soon as psychology started to gain scientific relevance, so started the debate over how it was most appropriate to describe behavior and the human mind. Structuralism was first introduced by Wilhelm Wundt. It was then formally named and established by one of his students named Edward B. Tichener who broke away from many of the previous ideas put forward by Wundt. Structuralism aims to describe the structure of the mind in terms of the most primitive elements of mental experience. It focused on the breaking down of the brains mental rocesses into its basic components. These basic components were then attempted to be discovered by a method known as introspection. Introspection can be defined as the examination or observation of one’s own mental and emotional processes. Structuralism is based on the idea tha t the aim of psychology is to investigate how the elements are relate to each other which is done by the study into sensations, images and feelings. Functionalism was formulated as a reaction to structuralism and aims to explain mental processes in a more accurate manner than structuralism.It does this by focusing on the purpose of consciousness and behavior. It was brought forward by William James (1842-1910) and was derived from the theory of natural selection created by Darwin which suggests that unless characteristics of a species, including the processes in the brain, served some sort of purpose they would not be selected over time by nature and would not have survived. There are weaknesses to both approaches. Structuralism was criticized for lacking reliability in its results due to the study of the structure of the mind being too subjective. Others argue that it was oo concerned with i nternal behavior that cannot be easily observed and therefore not easily measured. It could also be argued that everyday psychological problems cannot be solved by looking at the sensations of them alone and the mental operations that are promoted by functionalism have to be considered. VI. Conclusion Functionalism formed as a reaction to the structuralism and was heavily influenced by the work of William James and the evolutionary theory of Charles Darwin. Functionalists sought to explain the mental processes in a more systematic and accurate manner.Rather than focusing on the elements of consciousness, functionalists focused on the purpose of consciousness and behavior. Functionalism also emphasized individual differences, which had a profound impact on education. Work Cited: * James, William. The principle of Psychology. Vol. 1 and 2. 1890. Dover publications 1950. * James, William. Psychology (Briefer Course) (1892) University of Notre Dame Press 1985: Dover Publications 2001. * Wade, Carole. Tavris, Carole. Psychology Tenth Edition. Upper Saddle River. Pearson Education 2011, 2008, 2006. * http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/William_James

Socrates's wisdom Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Socrates's wisdom - Essay Example In these regards, Socrates is indicated to give physical or scientific descriptions for things that are generally understood to be established through the works of the gods. As a response to these accusations Socrates indicates that he is innocent and goes about establishing his innocence through a number of rhetorical stories and speeches. One of the first such rhetorical strategies Socrates implements is through his story regarding Chaerephon and the oracle. Socrates had earlier been accused of teaching the Athenian youth that elements in the world had physical explanations despite their generally being attributed to the gods. In response to these accusations, Socrates indicates that he is innocent as such knowledge is the domain of the Sophists. Instead, Socrates relays a story about his friend Chaerephon who goes to visit the Delphi Oracle. When he entered the Oracle he asked it if there was anyone alive more wise than Socrates. The oracle responded that there wasn’t. Upon learning of this information Socrates became confused, as he did not believe that he was particularly wise. Subsequently, Socrates went around asking and questioning people he had previously thought wise.

Antigone Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 1

Antigone - Essay Example While one brother was buried with all honors, the other was left to rot in the sun under punishment of King Creon if any should attempt burial procedures. Antigone, outraged at the dishonor shown her family regardless of the outside circumstances, also expresses her deep-seated belief that it is against the wishes of the gods to leave any of their subjects unburied. Meanwhile, King Creon issued the order regarding the brothers’ remains as a means of showing his extreme loyalty to the state and demonstrating his suitability to be king. This conflict between King Creon showing loyalty to the state and Antigone showing loyalty to family and to the gods highlights two of the most important issues facing the Greeks but ultimately Sophicles supports the concept that it is family and adherence to the rules of the gods that are most important in life in Antigone’s marginal victory over Creon in death. Antigone enters the first scene of the play already in a rage after learning that the new king, Creon, has forbidden to allow one of her brothers to be buried, introducing the central conflict of the play immediately. She decides to go against the king’s orders, arguing that burying the dead is the right thing to do. â€Å"Antigone, driven by family duty and love, cannot but fight against Creon’s decision.† (Lathan, 2002). Her pride in family makes it impossible for her to drop the issue and her stubborn determination to abide by what she feels is right makes it impossible for her to approach the issue in any way other than head-on. It is clear she’s outraged that the king would tell her what to do when she is talking to her sister at the very beginning of the play: â€Å"What’s this they’re saying now, / something our general has had proclaimed / throughout the city? Do you know of it? / †¦ / Dishonours which better fit our enemies / are now being piled up on the ones we love† (Johnston,