Marijuana Legalization Essay Example for Free

Marijuana Legalization Essay Marijuana legalization is a unique issue currently gaining momentum in America. Over 25 million Americans have used marijuana in the past year, 100 million have tried the drug at least once, and 14 million use regularly (â€Å"About Marijuana†). The growth, sale, possession, and consumption of marijuana for any reason are against federal law. Two states, Colorado and Washington, have legalized recreational marijuana use for adults over the age of 21, and sixteen additional states and Washington D. C. have legalized medical marijuana (â€Å"Pot Legalization Could Save†). However, all of these states are acting illegally according to federal law. Marijuana legalization is a complex issue that could upend cultural tradition, affect the economy, potentially affect crime and individual health, and challenge the balance of state and federal powers. The government’s purpose as stated in the Preamble of the Constitution is â€Å"to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty†¦Ã¢â‚¬ . The constitutionality of marijuana criminalization thus depends on its effectiveness in promoting these goals. Three central areas to consider in the debate for or against legalization are the medical risks, the social effects, and the economic effects. The medical effects of marijuana have been fairly well studied. It is important to compare the medical risks of marijuana use versus use of drugs that are commonly and legally used and abused, such as tobacco and alcohol, as well as to distinguish between use and abuse. Smoking marijuana is widely presumed to have adverse effects on lung health. Smoking marijuana leads to the inhalation of up to three times as much tar as smoking cigarettes, probably because marijuana users inhale differently, breathing more deeply and waiting longer to exhale. Marijuana smoke can also contain up to 70 percent more carcinogens than tobacco smoke (Dohney). However, few marijuana users smoke as frequently as tobacco users. A study that was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association looked at marijuana smokers who averaged one joint per day for seven years and found no adverse effects on lung function (Dohney). In another study, called the CARDIA study (Coronary Artery Risk Developments in Young Adults), occasional and moderate marijuana users actually had increased lung capacity over tobacco smokers and non-smokers. For those who smoked marijuana 20 or more times per month, lung capacity dipped back to normal non-smoking levels, but only the most chronic marijuana smokers experienced lung capacity below an average non-smoker (Szalavitz, â€Å"Lung Damage†). Studies have thus far failed to link marijuana smoking and lung cancer. Although marijuana smoke is carcinogenic, THC (the active drug in the marijuana plant) also has anti-inflammatory and tumor-inhibiting properties, decreasing the risk of lung disease (Szalavitz, â€Å"Lung Damage†). Based on these conclusions, marijuana use is much less dangerous than tobacco use from a pulmonary standpoint. Additionally, many marijuana users ingest THC by inhaling vapor, eating it in baked goods, drinking it after simmering, or by swallowing concentrated capsules. These methods are increasing in popularity and don’t cause the same exposure to carcinogenic smoke (Dohney). Reduction in brain function is another commonly cited negative health effect of marijuana use. Judgment, coordination, attentiveness, reaction time, perception, and other mental functions can be altered while under the influence of marijuana. The assumption of such a statement is often that performing activities such as driving while high on marijuana is dangerous, but that assumption has not been emphatically confirmed in the consistent and extensive array of studies on drugged driving. Marijuana users are typically aware of slowed reaction time and impaired coordination, and they compensate by driving more cautiously (â€Å"Marijuana and Driving†). In one study, researchers compared driving under the influence of marijuana with driving under the influence of alcohol. They concluded, â€Å"Subjects who have received alcohol tend to drive in a more risky manner. Both substances impair performance; however, the more cautious behavior of subjects who have received marijuana decreases the impact of the drug on performance, whereas the opposite holds true for alcohol† (A.  Smiley). Of course, no one is advocating for impaired driving of any kind, be it under the influence of alcohol, marijuana, over the counter or prescription medication, or even fatigue. It is important to note, however, that driving high is less dangerous than driving under the influence of alcohol or some other drugs (Marijuana and Driving). Long-term concerns about impaired brain function from marijuana use are unfounded. Impairment of memory and learning ability don’t appear to extend beyond the time of the high itself. The popular image of young people ‘smoking themselves stupid’ has perpetuated an assumption that marijuana use is to blame for decreased intelligence. In a comprehensive study by the Centre for Mental Health Research at Australian National University, however, researchers concluded that apparent differences in intelligence among non-users, former users, light users, and heavy users were actually linked to participants sex, socio-economic backgrounds, and levels of education rather than to marijuana use itself. When these factors were considered, the effect disappeared and even heavy marijuana users did not show cognitive decline (Szalavitz, â€Å"Cognitive Impairment†). It is harder to determine the effect of marijuana on adolescents with developing brains. Legalization laws apply to adults over the age of 21, however, rendering that concern irrelevant. It is also notable that marijuana overdose can not cause death, while alcohol poisoning is responsible for numerous deaths every year (â€Å"About Marijuana†). Overall, the negative health effects (if any) of responsible, adult marijuana use are consistently found to be far less significant than the negative effects of the legal drugs alcohol and tobacco. In no proven way does marijuana pose a significant public health hazard. Different countries and states have and enforce very different drug laws, but in many places possession or cultivation of small amounts of marijuana has been decriminalized. Certain Australian states, Canada, some European countries, including the Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, Spain, and Belgium, and several Latin American countries, including Peru, Argentina, Mexico, Chile, and Paraguay, are key examples of countries where personal use is legally acceptable (â€Å"World Marijuana Laws†). Many critics of marijuana legalization cite increased crime rates, increased use of marijuana and other drugs, and increased underage usage as potential issues. Exploration of the effects of legalization in other countries, as well as recently in Colorado and Washington, can show that these concerns are largely unfounded. Studies consistently find that decriminalization does not lead to increased usage of marijuana or other drugs (â€Å"Marijuana Decriminalization†). A study in the Journal for Public Health Policy, for example, stated: The available data indicate that decriminalization measures substantially reduced enforcement costs, yet had little or no impact on rates of use in the United States. In the South Australian community, none of the studies have found an impact in cannabis use which is attributable to the introduction of the Cannabis Expiation Scheme [decriminalization] (E. Single). As far as underage usage is concerned, drug dealers will of course never be bothered by the age of their clients. Legalization would be the only way for underage usage to be controlled, as licensed dealers would not be able to sell to those under 21 (â€Å"Legalization Will Reduce Crime†). No one has successfully linked marijuana use to increased violence, reckless behavior, or injury (E. Single). Alcohol abuse, however, is widely linked to violent crime, with an estimated 32 to 50 percent of homicides preceded by alcohol consumption (Gywenne). One of the only dangers associated with marijuana is a direct result of its illegality: innocents that stumble upon illicit farms or stashes are sometimes killed by farmers or traffickers to protect themselves from exposure (Quinones). These deaths, as well as deaths and injury due to fighting between traffickers, dealers, and clients, could be avoided by government regulated growth and sale of marijuana. Illicit drug producers and cartels seek one thing: profit. Because of marijuana’s illegality, secrecy is a key component of their success. They are not afraid to use extreme, ruthless measures to accomplish that end, and the legalization of marijuana would result in the loss of their most widespread market (â€Å"About Marijuana). The potential economic effects of decriminalization of marijuana are huge. It would cut criminal justice spending enormously by decreasing costs associated with catching and processing users (Bradford). Again, there is no established link between marijuana legalization and increased use, as well as no connection between use and crime (â€Å"Marijuana Decriminalization†). Nearly 850,000 people were arrested on marijuana-related charges last year, and ninety percent were for possession only (â€Å"Legalization Will Reduce Crime†). Prosecution for marijuana possession and time spent incarcerated can have devastating effects on an individual, shattering opportunities and creating massive obstacles in nearly every area of life (Gywenne). Beyond saving monetary resources and protecting the future of individuals who use marijuana responsibly, legalization would save time and human resources for more significant crimes in an overwhelmed legal system. More than 300 economists have signed a petition showing their agreement with a report stating that, between savings in the law enforcement department and potential tax revenues, the U. S. could save $13. 7 billion dollars per year. Other economists cite much larger savings, up to $100 billion (â€Å"Pot Legalization Could Save†). Marijuana is the largest cash crop in twelve American states, and in the top five in thirty-nine states (â€Å"Legalization Will Reduce Crime†). Nationwide, the industry is valued at around thirty-six billion dollars annually (Bradford). A market that large has huge economic implications and power, could create a considerable number of jobs, and legalization could reduce the cost of marijuana and thus inject a significant amount of money previously used for marijuana into other areas of the economy. Marijuana use does have the potential to be harmful, just as alcohol has the potential to be harmful. However, most marijuana use is not harmful. Legalization should allow for responsible use by adults only. Underage usage, impaired driving, smoking marijuana in public non-smoking areas, and the abuse of marijuana should be defined and prosecuted accordingly. The distinction between marijuana use and abuse is critical. Legalization would allow for more effective control of marijuana abuse, while decreasing violence, conserving resources, avoiding the dangers of questionable quality and purity due to unreliable dealers and farmers, and allowing for responsible use. Use of marijuana and other drugs would not increase significantly, crime would not increase, and health is a minimal concern. The marijuana debate comes down to a question of constitutionality. Does criminalizing marijuana promote the goals stated in the preamble, or is it counterproductive? Criminalizing the drug does not â€Å"form a more perfect union†, but rather raises a conflict between state and federal governments and the American population. Does it â€Å"establish justice†? It instead takes resources away from more serious issues of social justice to prosecute individuals who wish to responsibly exercise a choice. The criminalization of marijuana certainly works against the effort to â€Å"ensure domestic tranquility† by encouraging an underground market whose ruthless perpetrators resort to violence to protect their profit. On a similar note, it can be said that criminalization does not â€Å"provide for the common defense† or â€Å"promote the general welfare† because it promotes violence and because marijuana use does not pose a significant threat to public health or safety. Finally, legalization would â€Å"ensure the blessings of liberty† by allowing adults to make their own informed decisions about the use of the drug. Looking at each aspect individually, it becomes more and more clear that recreational marijuana legalization would be beneficial and constitutional. Word Count: 1906

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Physics Instrumentation

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Physics Instrumentation TITLE : MRI IMAGE ARTIFACTS MOHAMAD AL-HAFIZ BIN IBRAHIM Name of Student: Mohamad Al-Hafiz bin Ibrahim TABLE OF CONTENTS (Jump to) LIST OF FIGURES 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 MRI ARTIFACTS 2.1 RF leakage 2.2 Aliasing 2.3 Patient motion 2.4 Gibbs Truncation 2.5 Chemical Shift 2.6 Magnetic Susceptibility 2.7 Flow Motion 3.0 CONCLUSION 4.0 REFERENCES LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Zipper Artifact may appear as horizontal line across the image Figure 2: The part of the body that outside the FOV is mismapped within the FOV. Figure 3:The appearances of ghost lines at the anterior to the abdominal wall Figure 4: Image shown the effect of head movement or motion during MR scanning Figure 5: Bright and dark lines are visible in image Figure 6: Arrow show dark line at the interface of fat and water . Figure 7: MR image shown massive distortion of magnetic field . Figure 8: (a) CSF pulsation-related artifact in the phase encoding direction in T2-weighted image while (b) show reduction of flow artefact 1.0 INTRODUCTION Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is one of the medical imaging and diagnosis technique which widely used due to its capability to produce high resolution of cross- sectional anatomical images and high tissues contrast. Eventhough MRI has various advantageous features, but still there are numerous sources of artifacts either patient-related, signal processing-dependent and hardware (machine) related (Erasmus, Hurter, Naudà ©, Kritzinger, Acho, 2004). Definitely, artifacts can degrade the image quality and may mimicking pathology or obscure the abnormalities which can lead to misdiagnosis of MRI images. The MRI artifact can be defined as a structure or feature appearing in MRI image produced by artificial means which is not originate within the scanned object (Erasmus et al., 2004). Commonly, MRI artifacts can be caused by RF leakage, aliasing, patient motion, Gibbs, truncation, chemical shift, magnetic susceptibility and flow motion. 2.0 MRI ARTIFACTS 2.1 RF leakage Cause This artifact also known as Zipper artifact. It occurs when there are leakage of RF or electromagnetic energy generated from certain equipment into MRI system (Stadler, Schima, Ba-Ssalamah, Kettenbach, Eisenhuber, 2007). This extrinsic RF came at a certain frequency then interferes with MRI signal produced by patient. The potential sources of the extrinsic RF are due to penetration of the RF into the shielded scanning room especially when the door is open during images acquisition (Ruan, 2013). After that, the RF will be picked up by the receiver chain of the image sub system (Zhuo Gullapalli, 2006). This RF perhaps generated by radio, illumination or electronic device such as monitoring equipment in the surrounding (Stadler et al., 2007). Remedy In order to overcome this artifact, the operator should identified and eliminate the possible source of the penetration. It can be done by ensure the door of the MR room remain closed during scanning, use only MR compatible MR monitor equipment, and remove the external RF source from the surrounding (Ruan, 2013). Figure 1: Zipper Artifact may appear as horizontal line across the image (Allen, n.d.). 2.2 Aliasing Cause Aliasing or wrap around artifacts can be describe as an artifacts that caused by anatomy that lies outside of field of view (FOV) mismapped within the FOV (Westbrook, Roth, Talbot, 2011). This is because of improper selection of parameter in MR systems especially FOV. The FOV in MRI means the anatomical area that should be covered or imaged during scanning (Morelli et al., 2011). When the selected FOV is smaller than the size of area that should be imaged means the data are under-sampled (Ruan, 2013). Therefore, there are high chances for signals from the outside FOV falsely detect then create an interference with signal within FOV and encode on the reconstructed images thus ‘wrap around’ to the opposite side of image which become aliasing artifacts (Erasmus et al., 2004). Westbrook et al., (2011) state that aliasing artefact can happen along frequency encoding axis (frequency wrap) and phase encoding axis (phase wrap). Remedy Basically, this aliasing artifacts can be eliminated through increase the sampling rate or oversampling along the frequency direction (Westbrook et al., 2011). However, high pass and low pass filter should be used as well in order to filter out frequency outside the FOV which can increase noise in image (Hiroshi, Schlechtweg, Kose, 2009). Besides that, selection of receiver coil which unable to excite or detect the signals from anatomical tissues that lying outside the FOV also important to minimise the artifacts (Ruan, 2013). Lastly, No Phase Wrap (NPW), Phase oversampling or Fold Over supression techniques is also preferred to avoid aliasing artefact by oversamples in phase direction, thus, the phase curve get to extends and cover wider signal producing structures (Westbrook et al., 2011). Figure 2: The part of the body that outside the FOV is mismapped within the FOV and located at the opposite side of the image (Prashant, 2014). 2.3 Patient motion Cause Patient motion artifact is a very most common artefact in MRI. It is caused by movement of anatomical structure during imaging sequence (Zhuo Gullapalli, 2006). There is a broad range of examples of structure movement such as heart or arterial pulsations, respiration process, peristalsis, tremor (Parkinson’s disease) and gross movement of patient (Stadler et al., 2007). Hence, if there is a scanned anatomical part moved during the scanning, the phase gradient cannot predict and encode the signal, thus, that structures will be misplaced in phased encoding direction. As a result, it will causes MR images shown the appearances of mismapping, blurring and ghosting artefact within it (Westbrook et al., 2011). Remedy There are several ways to eliminate or avoid the patient motion artifacts. The remedies are nullifies signal by applying pre-saturation pulses over the area which have potential to produce artifacts (Stadler et al., 2007). This way is more effective to prevent ghosting during patient swallowing. Besides that, Westbrook et al (2011) proposed that attaching a set of bellows over patient’s chest in respiratory compensation which is also known as respiratory ordered phase encoding (ROPE) might help to minimize ghosting in longer sequences while in short sequences, cooperation from patient to hold their breath during scanning is preferred. Next,cardiac gating also plays role in reducing this kind of artefact. For example, electrocardiogram (ECG) gating used to monitors cardiac motion that trigger the excitation pulse. Hence, each excitation pulse in each slice can be timed and acquired at the same phase of cardiac cycle (Westbrook et al., 2011). In the other hand, asking for patient cooperation for keeping still, clear explanation about procedures, and optimize the patient’s comfortability are important to make them immobilize during scanning (Hiroshi et al., 2009). Figure 3:The appearances of ghost lines at the anterior to the abdominal wall indicate as motion artifact because of breathing (Zhuo Gullapalli, 2006). Figure 4: Image shown the effect of head movement or motion during MR scanning (Hornak, n.d.) 2.4 Gibbs Truncation Cause Truncation artefact also can be called as Gibbs Ringing artefact (Czervionke, Czervionke, Daniels, Hauhgton, 1988). Its happen as result of It is causes by abrupt undersampling of data that results in incorrect representation of high and low signals interfaces (Westbrook et al., 2011). That problems lead to visibility of fine lines in MR image and also respectively caused by incomplete digitization of the echo (Ruan, 2013). However, according to Erasmus et al.,(2004), alternating dark and bright lines may visible in image due to a sharp transition in signal intensity. Remedy In order to correct this type of artefact, there are several ways that can be used. For example, increase the matrix size, 256 x 256 instead of 256 x 128 (Westbrook et al., 2011). Next, applying various filters to k-space data before Fourier transform also should be considered (Erasmus et al., 2004). Besides that, provide more phase encoding steps also preferred to make truncation or gibbs artifacts less intense and narrower (www.mr-tip.com, n.d.). Figure 5: Bright and dark lines are visible in image parallel and adjacent to the outer convexity of calvaria (Prashant, 2014). 2.5 Chemical Shift Cause This type of artifact commonly found in MRI image of abdominal and spine imaging. Since fat and water each consist of hydrogen protons but different combination of molecules, fat contain hydrogen binds with carbon,while in water, hydrogen combine with oxygen (Westbrook et al., 2011). Hence, that different chemical environment exist shown that there are different precession frequency between fat and water which fat has lower precessional frequency rather than water (Erasmus et al., 2004). Based on the Larmor equation, precessional frequency is proportional to the strength of magnetic field (Westbrook et al., 2011). Therefore, this chemical shift can become artifact due to that difference of the precessional frequency between fat and water at higher field of magnetic strengths during the frequency encoding or slice-select directions (Ruan, 2013). That frequency is basically used to encode their spatial positions, thus, any chemical shift can lead to spatial misregistration of the MR si gnal (Morelli et al., 2011). MR images will show the bright or dark outlines at fat-water interfaces as the artefact. Remedy To avoid this artefact , a few remedies should be considered such as perform scanning at low magnetic field strength, increase the receive bandwidth in keeping with good signal-noise-ratio (SNR) (Westbrook et al., 2011) . It is also suggested to use minimum FOV as possible. Lastly, swapping phase and encoding direction also may useful to reduce this artefact (Hiroshi et al., 2009). Figure 6: Arrow show dark line at the interface of fat and water indicate as chemical shift artefact (Javan, Rear, Machin, 2011). 2.6 Magnetic Susceptibility Cause Susceptibilty can be refer as characteristic of substance which be magnetized when exposed to magnetic field (Gary, n.d.). MRI physics explain magnetic susceptibility artifacts normally happens because of substance or material especially ferromagnetic materials and also at air-tissues interface which have different degree of magnetic susceptibility that can distort the external magnetic field when placed in large magnetic field. Besides that, the differences also lead to magnetic field inhomogeneity at the scanner region resulting in spins dephase faster and frequency shift between surrounding tissues (Zhuo Gullapalli, 2006). Artifacts in the image will appear as bright and dark areas with spatial distortion of anatomical structures (Stadler et al., 2007). Remedy Generally, these artifacts can be reduced by ensure all metal objects that attached to the patient has been removed before the scan. Next, spin echo sequences are more preferred to be used instead of gradient echo because it use 180 ° RF rephasing pulse which ideal at compensating for phase differentiation between fat and water (Westbrook et al., 2011). Since fast spin echo techniques also contribute in reduction of this type of artefact, hence, short TE is used along with spin echo (Stadler et al., 2007). Metal Artefact Reduction Sequence (MARS) technique can be used in order to minimize the size and intensity of this artifact which developed by magnetic field distortion by introducing an additional gradient following the slice gradient during frequency encoding gradient is used (Olsen, Munk, Lee, 2000). Figure 7: MR image shown massive distortion of magnetic field due to implanted dental retention system (Schubert, 2012). 2.7 Flow Motion Cause Flow artefact can be categorized as one kind of motion artefact which mainly caused by natural motion of liquids such as blood or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in the body. For example, hydrogen nuclei in blood flow within the scanned slice may trigger excitation from an incoming RF pulse, however, the signal perhaps cannot be readout due to possibility of that flowing blood have left the slice (Hiroshi et al., 2009). As a result, vessels image appear empty or low signal intensity (less bright). Generally, there are reasons of low signal intensity such as intravascular signal void by time of flight effects, first echo dephasing and fast flow (Hiroshi et al., 2009). Nevertheless, this artifacts also can appear bright or high signal intensity. This is because of the slow blood flow (flow related enhancement), even echo rephrasing and diastolic pseudogating (Hiroshi et al., 2009). Remedy The preferred solutions as remedies for flow motion artifacts are by reduction of phase shifts using flow compensation in order to produce gradient moment nulling, suppress the blood signal by apply saturation pulses parallel to slices and synchronization of imaging sequences with cardiac cycle using cardiac triggering (Zhuo Gullapalli, 2006). Figure 8: (a) CSF pulsation-related artifact in the phase encoding direction in T2-weighted image while (b) show reduction of flow artefact with gradient moment nulling (Morelli et al., 2011). 3.0 CONCLUSION It is important for all operators, radiologist and engineers in MRI are able to recognize common MRI artifacts because there are a broad of range of cause that contributing to artefact. Eventhough, artifacts are unable to be totally eliminated but it can be minimized or avoided with specifics remedies in order to improve the MR image quality (Morelli et al., 2011). Therefore, basic knowledge of MRI artifacts should be learned and all MRI system operators should familiar with their MRI unit in department. 4.0 REFERENCES Allen, E. D. (n.d.). Zipper and Related Artifacts. Retrieved May 9, 2015, from http://mri-q.com/zipper-artifact.html Czervionke, L. F., Czervionke, J. M., Daniels, D. L., Hauhgton, V. M. (1988). Characteristic features of MR truncation artifacts. American Journal of Roentgenology, 151, 1219–1228. http://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.151.6.1219 Erasmus, L. J., Hurter, D., Naudà ©, M., Kritzinger, H. G., Acho, S. (2004). REVIEW ARTICLE: A Short Overview of MRI Artefacts. SA Journal of Radiology, 8(August), 13–17. http://doi.org/10.1021/jp1019944 Gary, P. L. (n.d.). What is MRIà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¯? Magnetic Resonance Imaging ( MRI ). Hiroshi, Y., Schlechtweg, P., Kose, K. (2009). Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Imaging of Arthritis and Metabolic Bone Disease:Expert Consult Online and Print, p34–48. http://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511549854.007 Hornak, J. P. (n.d.). The Basics of MRI: Image Artifacts. Retrieved May 9, 2015, from https://www.cis.rit.edu/htbooks/mri/chap-11/chap-11.htm Javan, R., Rear, J. R. O., Machin, J. E. (2011). Fundamentals Behind the 10 Most Common Magnetic Resonance Imaging Artifacts with Correction Strategies and. European Society of Radiology, 1–78. http://doi.org/10.1594/ecr2011/C-1248 Morelli, J. N., Runge, V. M., Ai, F., Attenberger, U., Vu, L., Schmeets, S. H., †¦ Kirsch, J. E. (2011). An image-based approach to understanding the physics of MR artifacts. Radiographicsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¯: A Review Publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc, 31, 849–866. http://doi.org/10.1148/rg.313105115 Olsen, R. V, Munk, P. L., Lee, M. J. (2000). Metal Artifact Reduction Sequence: Early Clinical Applications. Radiographicsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¯: A Review Publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc, 20, 699–712. Prashant, M. (2014). Aliasing artifacts. Retrieved May 11, 2015, from http://radiopaedia.org/cases/aliasing-artifacts Ruan, C. (2013). MRI Artifactsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¯: Mechanism and Control. Personal Conclusion, 1–9. Schubert, R. (2012). Magnetic susceptibility artifact. Retrieved May 9, 2015, from http://radiopaedia.org/cases/magnetic-susceptibility-artifact Stadler, A., Schima, W., Ba-Ssalamah, A., Kettenbach, J., Eisenhuber, E. (2007). Artifacts in body MR imaging: Their appearance and how to eliminate them. European Radiology, 17, 1242–1255. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0470-4 Westbrook, C., Roth, C. K., Talbot, J. (2011). MRI In Practice (4th Editio, pp. 225–260). United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. www.mr-tip.com. (n.d.). MRI Artifacts. Retrieved May 8, 2015, from http://www.mr-tip.com/serv1.php?type=artsub=Gibbs Artifact Zhuo, J., Gullapalli, R. P. (2006). AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: MR artifacts, safety, and quality control. Radiographicsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¯: A Review Publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc, 26, 275–297. http://doi.org/10.1148/rg.261055134

Impact of the Industrial Revolution

Impact of the Industrial Revolution Can you imagine life without these machines? Introduction At the dawn of the 18th century, technological and scientific advancements led to England being one of the most powerful and successful maritime power in the world. Foreign trade had scaled new heights and the demand for manufactured goods had increased. As a result of the use of machinery for agriculture, there was not much work in the rural areas. People migrated to towns looking for opportunities for work. Manufacturers attempted to find ways to increase production to meet the new demands. All these factors, among others, led to what was later termed as ‘The Industrial Revolution’ by historian Arnold Tonybee. Onset of the Industrial Revolution Life before the Industrial Revolution was tough. For centuries, man had relied on animals and himself, to do all the work and make objects of daily use. With new technological advancements, man started to rely on technology to perform similar tasks – quickly and efficiently. This change from an agrarian economy where hand tools were used, to one, where machines such as the seed drill, steam engine, etc. were invented, factories were established, resulting in complete change in the life of the people is termed as the Industrial Revolution. Features of the Industrial Revolution One of the most important features of the Industrial Revolution was the various inventions made during the time that went on to change the course of history forever. Eli Whitney’s invention of the cotton gin helped separate the cotton from its seed approximately fifty times faster than before. Jethro Hull, a farmer, invented a seed drill which planted grains very efficiently. Increase in the production of raw material meant that there was loads of raw material to be processed, especially in the case of textiles such as cotton. A weaver named James Hargreaves gave the much needed breakthrough by inventing the spinning jenny, a machine that spun many threads at once, though they were thick. Richard Awkright, invented the spinning frame, also known as the water frame. It spun thicker thread into thinner and stronger ones. It was Samuel Crompton’s spinning mule that made the large scale production of yarn possible. Edmund Cartwright invented the power loom that further incr eased the production of cloth and reduced labour costs as well. Inventions of machines led to the formation of factories for production of cloth. Mass production of cotton and cotton fabrics led to a great reduction in the prices. These inventions changed the socio-economic structure of England as weavers and workers were able to earn good wages and lead a better life.  Ã‚   Although the cotton mills marked the beginning of the Industrial revolution, it is the invention of James Watt’s steam engine that powered and continued it. The steam engine used the force of steam to power engines. Invention of this machine brought about many changes in England. Factory owners realised that they could now build factories where people lived and need not construct them it near a water source, as they did earlier. It was Abraham Darby’s ability to cast iron in a coke-fueled furnace that enabled inventors like Thomas Newcomen to have his steam engines cast by Darby[3]. Henry Bessemer’s invention of the Bessemer Converter enabled inexpensive manufacture of steel abundantly. The transportation system was completely overhauled when steam powered trains and other locomotives were built. The transformation of roads and railways made travel and shipping of goods fairly comfortable and cheap. [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] The invention of the steam engine, usage on iron and steel in ships was useful in manufacturing ships that were much faster. Ships started voyaging through oceans which in turn increased trade even further. This period of intense industrialisation witnessed a major change in architecture and infrastructure. New towns came up that boasted of town halls, libraries, gardens, concert halls, etc. [9] Another important feature of the Industrial Revolution was the change in the socio-economic life of the people. As factories were set up and towns formed, people moved to towns in search of employment which made urbanization, a common feature of the Industrial Revolution. Historians are of the opinion that although some women stayed at home to look after the children, many worked in factories with their husbands. Sometimes, children were made to work in factories as well. In general, the Industrial Revolution improved the standard of living of the people as they were able to afford the basic necessities of life and could indulge in leisure activities during their free time. People read books, went on vacation, enjoyed concerts or spent days on the beach, educated themselves, etc. to pass their time. People started to take an active part in politics as well. [10] Why did the Industrial Revolution originate in England? Having read about the different features of the Industrial Revolution, it now becomes imperative to read about certain conditions that came together to set the scene for its inception. Colonies like India were a good source of raw material such as cotton for their factories in England. The colonies were good markets too as they sold their manufactured goods there. Being a supreme maritime power with one of the largest ships in the world, it was easy for England to transport the raw material and the finished products. A stable government at the centre, with few restrictions on the economy, helped the industry and commerce to thrive. Laws made by the government favoured the companies that set up factories and businesses. Natural resources such as coal and iron were available in abundance to be used in factories. Streams and rivers in England were used to generate power and served as a medium of transportation of goods and raw materials. England, to begin with, was a prosperous country and people had extra money to spend on other things besides the basic needs of food, clothing and shelter.[11] Impact of the Industrial Revolution The Industrial Revolution became the most noteworthy ensemble of social, cultural and economic change that affected human history. Let us discuss some of them. There was a tremendous increase in population during the Industrial Revolution as the standard of living improved and fewer people died due to diseases. The Industrial Revolution led to capitalism, that is, the business was owned privately and operated primarily for profit. The industrial revolution divided the society into different classes the factory owners who owned the factory and the workers who worked for him. The owners of the factories exploited the workers to maximise their profit. New cities and towns came up as the factory owners established factories closer to where they lived. People who worked in factories had to leave their houses and shift to these places, often with their families. The Industrial Revolution completely changed the lives of the workers. From being a craftsperson who worked using hand tools, he was merely reduced to a machine operator. Weavers and other craftsmen who tried to make a living by making goods at home found it difficult to sell their products as their hand-made goods were more expensive than the machine-made ones. The Industrial Revolution gave rise to imperialism. England was faced with two problems during the Industrial revolution – Procuring of cheap raw materials and a market for their manufactured goods. They solved these problems by gaining political and economic control over weaker countries. [12] Though the Industrial Revolution began in England, it gradually spread to the other countries of the world as well. Imperialism Industrialisation stirred the aspirations of England. They wanted to maximise the profit of their industries. England wanted resources to fuel their production as well as a market to sell their goods. Weaker countries such as India were the perfect target. This policy of England to acquire political, economic and social control over a weaker country is known as imperialism. Imperialism was one of the worst impacts of industrialisation. England sourced the raw materials of their products from these countries and sold the manufactured products in these countries itself at exorbitant prices. Imperialism involves the use of power, military or otherwise to exercise control over the weaker country. [13] Imperialism destroyed the culture and the local industries of the colonies. Inexpensive foreign goods destroyed the markets of local indigenous products. No effort was made to modernize the colonies. Agriculture was also affected as the imperialists allowed the colonies to grow those crops that were beneficial to them, whether or not it was conducive to the locals. We shall study about the British policies and plans in India later in the book. Peep into the Past Iron Bridge The World’s first Iron Bridge built on River Severnin England is one of the most famous industrial monuments in Britain. Shropshire, the area in which it was built was famous for its coal deposits. The steep Severn gorge posed a problem for transportation of people and goods. Architect Thomas Pritchard suggested ironmaster John Wilenson make the iron bridge. Though Wilkenson started the project in 1777, the iron bridge was completed by Abraham Darby in 1779. It was opened to the public on January 1, 1781. The bridge was used for over 150 years before it was shut down for vehicles in 1934. The Iron Bridge was designated as an ancient monument. It is now a World Heritage Site. [1] http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/publications/online_research_catalogues/paper_money/paper_money_of_england__wales/the_industrial_revolution.aspx [2] World Socities – Mckay Hill – pg – 747, 748, 749 [3] http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/151458/Abraham-Darby#ref219821 [4] HOLT, Human Legacy, Page 634, 635, 636, 637 [5] World Socities – Mckay Hill – pg – 750-751-752 [6] http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/143809/Samuel-Crompton [7] http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/151458/Abraham-Darby [8] http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/642887/Eli-Whitney [9] http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/publications/online_research_catalogues/paper_money/paper_money_of_england__wales/the_industrial_revolution/the_industrial_revolution_2.aspx [10] HOLT, Human Legacy, page – 649, 650, 651, and http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/publications/online_research_catalogues/paper_money/paper_money_of_england__wales/the_industrial_revolution/the_industrial_revolution_3.aspx [11] HOLT, Human Legacy, pages – 633, 634, 635 [12] http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/287086/Industrial-Revolution [13] http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/283988/imperialism

The Cherry Orchard and the Rise of Bolshevism Essay example -- Anton C

The Cherry Orchard and the Rise of Bolshevism  Ã‚        Ã‚  Ã‚   Anton Chekhov uses The Cherry Orchard, to openly present the decline of an aristocratic Russian family as a microcosm of the rapid decline of the old Russia at the end of the nineteenth century--but also provides an ominous foreshadowing of the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in the disparate ideals of his characters, Trofimov and Lopakhin, however unintentionally. The Gayev family and their plight is intended as a symbolic microcosm of the fall of the aristocracy in society at large. Though the merchant Lopakhin is presented as the character who holds values of the new, post-aristocratic age, the student Trofimov espouses the political sentiments that will ultimately replace both the aristocratic class and the new commercial class. Chekhov's presenting Lopakhin as a pioneer of the new social order is undermined by the lines and role he gives to Trofimov, and the author discounts the importance of the then-emerging revolutionaries. Yet the play reveals a major reason why Commu nism ultimately received very little support from the gradual-minded middle class, which lead to a bloody revolution and totalitarian regimes for a good part of a century. It is this insight which provides contemporary critiques of socialist movements with a lesson about human nature -- a lesson that serves to show that Communism and other forms of ideological socialism have never been workers' movements, even if the movements temporally address workers' political demands.    Chekhov relies on several devices to proclaim to his audience that the changes taking place are not merely personal for the profligate Gayev family, but are part of an inevitable social evolution. Through these devices, Chekh... ... young revolutionaries who eventually seized Russia. Though the playwright dismisses the importance of these ideas, he offers a contrast of them with those of the bourgeoisie that explains why Russian Communism arrived through a bloody revolution and without middle-class support, and why for over seventy years of this century the world had to live with the results of the revolution.    Works Cited Chekhov, Anton. The Cherry Orchard. 1903. Jacobus 792-815. ----. Letter to K.S. Stanislavsky. Jacobus 816. Jacobus, Lee, ed. The Bedford Introduction To Drama. 3rd ed. Boston: Bedford Books, 1997. Levite, Allan. Guilt, Blame, and Politics. San Francisco: Stanyan Press, 1998. Pritchett, V.S. Chekhov: A Spirit Set Free. New York: Random House, 1988. Simmons, Ernest J. Chekhov: A Biography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962.   

My Socialization Essay -- essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  My socialization while growing up had everything to do with my parents. In my household I didn’t have just one certain style of parenting. My mother was a permissive parent, and my father was very much an authoritative dad. This was able to happen because my father travels a lot of the time and is out of the house, therefore giving me the chance take advantage of my mom being so much of a push over. When my father was gone on business I could get away with anything such as not cleaning my room, staying up as late as I wanted, and receiving anything I wanted. If my Mom did not giving in to my requests I would just throw a simple temper tantrum and five minutes later victory would be mine. On the other hand when my dad was around everything was to be done his way. If he didn’t think I needed it, I did not get it, no matter how much complaining and whining. In my Dads mind I had to deserve everything I received, if I did something wrong couple days earl ier he would remind me about it as I was asking for a bike or what ever else it is I wanted. Don’t get me wrong my dad wasn’t a mean guy or an abusive father, I knew my limits and when every I would get dumb enough to cross that line, he was right there to put back in my place.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  It isn’t hard for me to think back to my gendered socialization, strictly because me being a man was drilled into my head since the day that I was born. I was born on January 6th 1985 in a suburb of Olathe Kansas, and In Olathe high school sports are everything. I have pictures of me when I was five months old with cowboy outfits, and football uniforms. As I became old enough to walk I was thrown into every sport possible. I played football, baseball, soccer, and basketball. I had practice year round sometimes everyday, and no matter how much complaining I did I was at every practice everyday. My father wanted me to be the best at everything I did; therefore I spent many nights after practice practicing with him. When I was that young I enjoyed every second of practice with my father. Being the best was so deeply instilled in me that anytime I failed it was a catastrophe to me. For example in baseball I would probably only strike out three to four times a s eason, which is great looking back now, but when I did strike out I became irate. I would be kicked out of those three or fo... ...ang around them but they were way to boring for me. Now days I have a new group of friends, but homophily still takes place. They are my friends in my fraternity. We are all almost exactly alike, some may say too much alike and we have no diversity, but that’s the way we like it. We all like to go have a good time, and stay on the edge of breaking the law without falling over. I guess propinquity can be a role also because many of my fraternity brothers I met living in the dorms with them. I think that both homophily and propinquity plays roles in everyone’s relationships with others because when you see someone often you get to know each other whether you’re alike or not, and of course you’re going to get along with someone who has the same interest as you.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  As I write this paper I realize that all of these questions I was asked to answer all go back to the way I was raised. My anger with sports likely was cause by my dad longing for me to be great. Me homophily with all of the football players was a product of my parents making me do all of the sports. All in all I had a great upbringing and I wouldn’t change one thing.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  

Macomber

A crowd of natives has just carried Francis Macomber triumphantly into camp. Macomber, a good-looking athletic type, has just blown it on a lion hunting adventure and now everyone knows he's a coward. Macomber's wife can't contain her resentment and humiliation about her husband's breakdown on the hunt. This is not a proud moment for the Macombers. Shmoop Editorial Team. â€Å"The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber† Shmoop. com. Shmoop University, Inc. , 11 Nov. 2008. Web. 12 Apr. 2013. Hemingway's Short Stories By Ernest Hemingway Summary and Analysis â€Å"The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber†Ã¢â‚¬  Hemingway's Short Stories: Summary and Analysis: â€Å"The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber† Wiley Publishing, n. d. Web. 12 Apr. 2013. Hemingway, Ernest. â€Å"FAST-US-1 Intro to American English Reference File. † FAST-US-1 Intro to American English Reference File. Charles Scribner's Sons, 7 May 2010. Web. 12 Apr. 2013. â€Å"The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber. † Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 04 Nov. 013. Web. 12 Apr. 2013. Gaillard, Theodore L. â€Å"JSTOR. † The English Journal. Vol. 60. N. p. : National Council of Teachers of English, 1971. 31-35. The English Journal. Web. 12 Apr. 2013. I. Francis Macomber and his wife Margaret (usually referred to as â€Å"Margot†), are on a big-game safari in Africa, guided by professional hunter Robert Wilson. Earlier, Francis had panicked when a wounded lion charged him. Margot mocks Macomber for this act of cowardice, and it is implied that she sleeps with Wilson.The next day they hunt buffalo. When they find the buffalo, it charges Macomber. Francis, faced with a buffalo, suddenly becomes a man of courage, but his shots are too high. Wilson fires at the beast as well, but it keeps charging. Macomber kills the buffalo at the last second. At the same time, Margot had also fired a shot from the car, which instead hits Macomber in the skull and kills him. F or once, they are both on the same side, shooting at the same bull, but tragically she kills the man she was trying to save.In â€Å"The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber,† Hemingway uses his famously sparse prose style and villains with the moral make-up of animals to demonstrate the ironic truth that happiness is fleeting and had better not depend upon others. II. The narrator furnishes details, nothing more, but packs in those details is all the psychological nuance of a session with a psychoanalyst. In â€Å"The Short Happy Life,† a numerous basic actions can go a great distance. The sentences are certainly not fancy, but they reveal a ton about the characters.For example: â€Å"The mess boy had started them already, lifting the bottles out of the canvas cooling bags that sweated wet in the wind that blew through the trees that shaded the tents† (p. 1). Here, Hemingway speaks volumes in one sentence: the feeling in the air is apparent, he sets the visual scene, and he conveys ideas of class and environment. Readers know where they are, and what kind of people they are dealing with. Hemingway also lets the dialogue do a lot of the work. That way readers get to know the characters through what they say instead of having Hemingway tell them what to think.At the story's opening, for example, Margot says, â€Å"I'll have a gimlet too. I need something† (p. 1). This unadorned expression gives the reader their initial impression of Margot: She will drink because she needs something – but something for what? Something, readers soon find out, to dull the rage and disappointment over Macomber's failure and something as in â€Å"my husband gave me nothing, so give me something. † Lastly, this short sentence says â€Å"Macomber's wife,† not Margot, so readers know that this man's wife needs something, and she needs it because of him.That's a whole lot of meaning for eight short words. He omits things because he trust s the readers to be active, and to understand what he is saying indirectly. Hemingway packs a lot of unsaid things into the actual words on the page. III Animals: A technique that emerges as one of the most impressively effective is Hemingway’s use of animals, for behind the scenes of the five-act tragedy that constitutes â€Å"The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber† stalks a troupe of inhuman supporting actors whose effect on the understanding of Hemingway’s story is crucial.Wether in the from of a charging lion or, more subtly, in Margot Macomber’s back-handed reference to those â€Å"big cowy things that jump like hares† (p. 9), Hemingway uses his animal menagerie as a standard against which to measure and evaluate his human actors. Francis Macomber’s safari turns out to be quite different from a romantic adventure out of Martin Johnson’s storybook; Macomber’s adversaries are a far cry from â€Å"Old Simba the lion, the b uffalo, Tembo the elephant† (p. 22) and the Natural History Museum that the columnist describes.Hemingway suggests here that Macomber has emerged from the fairytale world of high society into the real world of tooth and claw. It is in conjunction with the animals they themselves hunt that readers can best evaluate Robert Wilson, Francis Macomber, and his wife. Wilson emerges as â€Å"the professional. † He is self-confident and almost detached from the jungle world of his employers. From Margaret’s point of view he seems a killer, but his â€Å"flat, blue, machine gunner’s eyes† (p. 8) ironically seem to raise Wilson into a position of dominance over the brutal struggle for supremacy that he witnesses.Margot Macomber, on the other hand, is deeply enmeshed in this struggle. Her husband labels her â€Å"a bitch† (p. 22) after her return from Wilson’s tent and refers to her â€Å"bitchery† (p. 10) elsewhere in the story, but more s pecific than this implicitly negative criticism of Macomber is Hemingway’s explicit use of animals as a verbal weapon in the mouth of Margot. To Francis’ self-punishment Margot adds criticism of her own. When Francis passes her some cooked eland he shot, she scoffs at his offering with the comment: â€Å"They’re the big cowy things that jump like hares, aren’t they? (p. 9). Rubbing salt into his wounded ego, she facetiously asks, â€Å"They’re not dangerous, are they? † (p. 9). All Francis has been able to shoot by this point in the safari are relatively harmless animals, and he has proved himself a coward in the face of the only dangerous game he has encountered. Although Hemingway links Margot with no specific animal, she does materialize as the condensation of all the most dangerous qualities of female carnivores. To Robert Wilson she is a typical American woman, one of the â€Å"hardest in the world: the hardest, the cruelest, the most predatory, nd the most attractive† (p. 8). Externally she is so â€Å"enameled in that American female cruelty† (p. 9) that she seems even more insensitive than Robert Wilson. While she is seen as cruel and predatory, her husband is compared with a rabbit and is at the end linked with the lion whose head is blown off by Wilson. Hemingway’s subtle identification of Macomber with the lion he is hunting serves a far more important purpose than symbolically to foreshadow his death at the hands of his wife.Indeed, it is through Macomber’s links with both the lion and the buffalo that readers become aware of his transition from emotional adolescence to manhood. Initially, the lion’s bravery and determination are used strictly as a contrast to Macomber’s rabbit-like trembling. In his struggle for survival the lion with half his head shot away kept â€Å"crawling on toward the crashing, blasting thing that had destroyed him† (p. 21). He stare d defiantly with â€Å"yellow eyes, narrowed with hate† (p. 19); similarly, â€Å"Francis Macomber found that, of all the many men that he had hated, he hated Robert Wilson the most† (p. 3). Momentarily facing the challenge posed by the lion, Macomber feels â€Å"sick at his stomach† (p. 16) and cannot control his shaking. â€Å"The fear was still there like a cold, slimy hollowin all the emptiness where once his confidence had been and it made him feel sick† (p. 11). The difference between Macomber and the lionis suggested by the nature of their respective wounds. Macomber’s psyvchological â€Å"wound† can be traced ultimately to his overall weakness and, more recently, to the effects of his â€Å"huntress† wife. But the lion’s wound is more a â€Å"red badge of courage† incurred in combat.Instead of fear, a . 30-06 220 grain solid bullet causes the â€Å"sudden hot scalding nausea† (p. 15) in the lion’s s tomach. In contrast, the nausea of fear experienced by Macomber is one of nothingness. The lion is broken down and fights his fate to the end, whereas Macomber has collasped internally, â€Å"gone to pieces nervously† (p. 8). Macomber bolts like a rabbit, where in the lion â€Å"all of him, pain, sickness, hatred and all of his remaining strength, was tightening into an absolute concentration for a rush† (p. 19) directly at his attackers.In death he becomes almost human. Macomber becomes, by his own admission, a rabbit. But Macomber changes. His metamorphosis from â€Å"rabbit† and â€Å"laddy-buck† occurs after the second crossing of the stream that separates the camp from the hunting ground. Just as we view the initial conflict through the lion’s stream-of-consciousness as he watched Macomber dismount from the car, so we now see Macomber observe â€Å"three huge, black animals looking almost cylindrical in their long heaviness, like big black ta nk cars† (p,27). The situation has been inverted.Where the lion saw the car and its passengers in animal terms, â€Å"bulking like some super-rhino† (p. 15), Macomber sees the animal in car terms. Hemingway’s inversion of style implies the conversion of Macomber to a lion-like figure and foreshadows his courageous birth into his all-too-short â€Å"happy life. † The hunter becomes the hunted; the man with newly achieved lion-like qualities falls prey to the predatory wife who has seen the change in her husband (p. 33) and herself has become white and ill with fear at what it portends.In Macomber’s death he is subtly linked with his own last victim, the buffalo: â€Å"Francis Macomber lay now, face down, not two yards from where the buffalo lay on his side.. † (p. 36). Linked with the buffalo both in the manner of death and by physical proximity, Macomber has, at last, achieved the transition from â€Å"rabbit† to lion, to bull, and to manhood. Hemingway’s subtle use of animals as an evaluative device has helped to turn what would have been a story of pitiableness into one that approaches tragedy.Hemingway is very careful with these details so that the reader can fully explore the extent to which Macomber has sunk. (margot dominant)In addition to Macomber’s embarrassed cowardice, he watches as Margot kisses Wilson on the mouth, calling him â€Å"the beautiful red-faced Mr. Wilson. † After Margot returns from sleeping with Wilson, readers learn about the reasoning for her marriage to Frances. She is too beautiful for Francis to divorce her, and Francis has too much money for her to ever leave him. When Macomber reminds Margot the there â€Å"wasn’t going to be any of that.You promised there wouldn’t be,† readers realize that this deceit has been going on for a long time. In years past Macomber has never been enough for his wife, but being here, on the safari, was supposed t o change all that. Yet Margo’s betrayal is so open and executed in such defiance that Macomber gets to know how very much his cowardice has changed everything. Margot will continue to press her advantage until the end, when she notices that Macomber is gaining courage and a strong sense of his own manhood.The shooting of the first buffalo marks the beginning of the tremendous change in Macomber. In all of his life, he has never felt so remarkable. On the other hand, Margot sits â€Å"very white faced. † She realizes that Macomber is changing, and she fears this change. She fears this change because she is losing psychological control over Macomber. She knows that if Macomber finally gains a sense of manhood, he will have the strength to leave her. She tries to taunt him, but he is oblivious to her existence. She now knows that his future does not include her.

Neolithic Revolution

The Neolithic Revolution is the single most important achievement in human history because it created civilization, developed agriculture, and new inventions were made to make life easier. Although some people may disagree with this statement, there is actual evidence that can prove it to be correct. During the time when early humans hunted and gathered, they would constantly have to move to different locations. This is because the animals that were hunted would die out and there would be nothing much to gather; this also caused starvation.When the unmans started using agriculture, they would produce their own food and that increased the populations; so bigger settlements started to form. Soon, there would be a whole civilization because there was a surplus amount of food that was grown. Also, the people that worked the farms came up with new and inventive inventions that would help them in their daily work; some of these inventions are still use today. When agriculture was first use d, some of the hunter gatherers had no choice to use it because food was scarce.However, when they did use it, they enjoyed it, causing hem to want to stay with the method. People started to build their own communities where cattle were raised and crops were grown. So much food was available that they did not have to worry about the starvation of the people. Since there weren't a lot of Jobs that needed to be completed (like hunt or gather) people lived a more peaceful life with agriculture to help supply their hunger needs. In my opinion, civilizations were created because agriculture brought people together and helped them live an easier life.Agriculture was so momentous that, I believe, human society wouldn't be where It Is today. During the Neolithic times, early humans needed to do hard laboring for long hours. So they were always trying to find a way to make It easier from them to do their Jobs. For example, In the Roots of the Western Tradition reading, when prepping the solo for the crops, the people would need to do that with a tool using their own hands. Until they found out that large animals could help do the Job twice as fast.Also In the reading, humans discovered more ways to use the animals Instead of for food; Like for clothes and for tools. These Inventions lead to more Intelligence In the communities, Like social classes and more Jobs for other people. Even though our time has advanced, people, Like farmers, still use a version of the tools that were created In 8000 B. C. The Neolithic Revolution Is a big debate whether It helped the human race or harmed It. Even though there are cons to the revolution, I believe that the pros are stronger than the negative affect that It left.The revolution lead to more excelled people and easier lives for everyone, who knows where the world would be today If agriculture was not created? Furthermore, I strongly believe that agriculture was one of the single most Important achievements In human history and ha t society today would not be the same without It. Neolithic Revolution By stairs wouldn't be where it is today. Hours. So they were always trying to find a way to make it easier from them to do their Jobs.For example, in the Roots of the Western Tradition reading, when prepping the soil for the crops, the people would need to do that with a tool using their own Also in the reading, humans discovered more ways to use the animals instead of for food; like for clothes and for tools. These inventions lead to more intelligence in the communities, like social classes and more Jobs for other people. Even though our mime has advanced, people, like farmers, still use a version of the tools that were created in 8000 B. C.The Neolithic Revolution is a big debate whether it helped the human race or harmed it. Even though there are cons to the revolution, I believe that the pros are stronger than the negative affect that it left. The revolution lead to more civilized people and easier lives for everyone, who knows where the world would be today if agriculture was not created? Furthermore, I strongly believe that agriculture was one of the single most important achievements in human history and that society today would not be the same without it. Neolithic Revolution While archaeologists are agreed on the implication of the Neolithic Revolution, it has not been so simple to determine exactly when food production began. In the first place, the classification of food production is dependent on our perceptive of domestication, an indefinite concept itself. Domestication can be distinct as the exploitation of plants and animals by humans in such a way as to cause some genetic, or morphological, change; more broadly, it is seen as a range of relationships between people, plants, and animals (Anne Birgitte Gebauer and T.Douglas Price , eds. , 1992). On one end of the range are morphologically domesticated plants like wheat, barley, peas, lentils, and bitter vetch. In these plants, changes brought concerning by artificially induced selective processes can be renowned by pale botanists studying the remains of seeds. Some morphologically domesticated plants, together with maize, dates, banana, and breadfruit, have been so altered that they are forever tie d to people, for they have lost their autonomous power of seed dispersal and germination.On the other end of the same range are plants that have been â€Å"domesticated† solely in terms of the growing space people offer for them. These plants, referred to as cultivated plants, are difficult if not viable to differentiate from wild plants, for their domestication is a matter of ecological rather than morphological change. In the middle range of the continuum lie all extents of domestication and cultivation. consequently, determining whether or not a past culture has cultivated plants often involves a fair amount of detective work.For example, the presence of seeds at Nahal Oren in Israel (ca. 18,000 B. C. ) of exactly the same cereal plants later domesticated indicates that certain plants might have been selected and cultivated at a very early date (Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza and Francesco Cavalli-Sforza, 1996). Determining the degree of animal domestication also entails some i nference and guesswork. As with plants, some animals (in the Near East, dogs, sheep, goats, cattle, and pigs) became hereditarily changed in time. But morphological changes did not take place for many generations, and in several instances they never took place at all. In these cases, paleozoologists should rely on other clues.The high percentage of gazelle bones in some early Neolithic sites, for illustration—three times more than any other species—probably indicates their â€Å"domestication† or at the very least their selective exploitation. In recent times the red deer, eland, and musk-ox have, for all realistic purposes, been domesticated perhaps in the same mode that the gazelle was in the early Neolithic. As with plants, some animal species are more easily cultivated than others. Studies on the herding behavior of animals suggest that definite species may be predated for domestication (Charles Heiser, 1990).The evolution from extensive dependence on gazell e to the domestication of sheep and goats may have resulted from the fact that sheep and goats utilize a wider range of foods, are added dependent on water supplies, and are better integrated into an inactive community. Because it is hard to determine the extent of domestication in past cultural systems, assigning agricultural status to a society is often a somewhat arbitrary decision that involves some ambiguity In short, there are extents of food production.Anthropologists and archaeologists can, though, agree on a working definition of food production. This definition posits two minimum requirements: first, there should be a reasonably competent level of food procurement (food acquired through direct production should amount to over half the community's dietary needs for part of the year); and second, both plant and animal domesticates are no longer bound to their natural habitat (that is, plants and animals can survive, with human assistance, in environments to which they are no t obviously adapted).The Neolithic Revolution was the result of the development of settled agriculture around 6,000 BC, which facilitated human beings for the first time to make nature grow what they wanted instead of living on what she reluctantly provided. The food surplus thus garnered supported a larger population—five or more times as large as from hunting and gathering—and permitted a small minority of them to specialize in other kinds of work, as craftsmen (especially of the new, highly finished stone tools which gave the modern name to the period), artists, warriors, priests, and rulers, and to construct the first towns and cities.The city (civis) gave its name to civilization, which formed the culture, the arts and crafts, the temples and palaces, and—it must be said—the weapons and fortifications, that have characterized history ever since. Principally, it created history itself: writing, invented for the purposes of management and ritual, had a s by-product the preservation, more consistent than oral tradition, of a record of events, and so entree to the past beyond human memory.The huge rise in the scale of organization stemming from this first revolt and the consequent growth in communal wealth and power created the first kingdoms and empires, and enabled them to grow, mainly by conquest, to ecumenical size. Over the next several millennia political entities as large as Sumeria, Egypt, China, Persia, and Rome and, by an independent and later improvement, the Inca and Aztec empires in the Western hemisphere governed stretches of the earth’s surface larger than most contemporary nation states.It was a mega-revolution in human society. Though it brought wealth and power to the few, it had venomous as well as beneficial effects for the many. Subsequent to the casual, care-free, imprudent life of hunting and gathering in humanity’s Eden, it symbolized for most a decline into heavy and continuous labor: ‘In the sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat bread. ’ It also meant yielding part of the excess food to the organizers and defenders of the community: to emend Marx, ‘All history is the history of the struggle for income.’ The prevailing elite, whether slave owners, tribute takers, or feudal lords, proscribed the scarce resource, the land, and so were able to take out ‘surplus value’ from the food producers and use it to ‘live like lords’ and inflate their span of command. The struggle for survival and conquest made combat the normal state of relations between neighboring communities. But there were benefits, in the inner peace which reigned for long periods within the borders, and the high culture, the arts of painting, sculpture, poetry, drama, music, and dance which could glee some of the people some of the time.Compared with pre-history, it was a life on a higher plane of subsistence. There were even professionals, officials, priests, docto rs, and lawyers, however they were for the most part subservient to the rich and influential, servants rather than masters (accept perhaps in the very few theocracies known to history). They were yet key players in the process. They invented, or set on a more enduring basis than oral tradition, all the arts and sciences: bureaucracy, organized religious conviction, philosophy, mathematics, astronomy, medicine, law. especially, the priests and bureaucrats invented writing, and so made history itself possible.That is why history begins with the cities of the Neolithic Revolution and not before. One other service was given by the European clergy, which made medieval Europe different from other civilizations and tiled the way for a further round of worldwide social change. as of the separation of church and state and the resultant equality of the Gelasian ‘two swords’, political control was never combined in Europe. A space was left between Empire and Papacy through which i ndependent thought, protest, and innovation could creep in and prevent the built-in stasis of most empires and theocracies.The Renaissance, the Reformation, the Scientific Revolution, and the Enlightenment, all found nutritious soil in which to grow, and independent thinkers, innovators and inventors could practice unregulated paths. Thus Europe, rather than some other area, became the origin of the next great social revolution. The earliest center of the Neolithic Revolution was southwestern Asia, more specifically the thousand miles between western Iran and Greece, including parts of what today are Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, and the Anatolian plateau of Turkey (Wesley Cowan and Patty Jo Watson, eds. , 1992).From about 8900 B. C. , semi settled or semi permanent â€Å"protoneolithic† communities subsisted in northern Iraq, where the people de- pended in part on domesticated sheep for their survival. These settlements, with a typical population of 100 to 150, must not be seen as villages or protocities, since they were not occupied year-round and did not house the diversity of occupations and classes we associate with an urban economy. One instance of such a settlement was Jericho, which housed a protoneolithic community by 7800 B C (Kathleen Kenyon, 1994). Between 7000 and 6000 B. C. , â€Å"aceramic† (i. e., before pottery) Neolithic sites were occupied in parts of Iraq and Iran; several scholars see signs of this period as early as 8000 B. C (Daniel Zohary and Maria Hopf, 1994). Neolithic cultures with pottery existed at Catal Huyuk in Anatolia (Turkey) by 6800 B. C. and in Iran by 6500 B. C. By 5600 B. C. , Neolithic settlements with pottery subsisted in Greek Macedonia. The Neolithic means of life had its beginnings in the foothills of the Zagros Mountains and on the Anatolian plateau, where water from natural sources was passable and crops could be grown without recourse to artificial irrigation.By about 5500 B. C. , however, the se original settlements gave way to much better communities in the nearby alluvial plains on the banks of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. Here, crops could be grown in adequate quantities only under irrigation, and the early stages of the Neolithic were replaced by the completely different urban way of life linked with ancient cities. By about 6000 B. C. , the first stage of the Neolithic Revolution was combined in southwestern Asia, where small villages had become the customary way to organize populations.The crops and animals that had been domestic here in the fertile crescent spread to become the basis for the great river civilizations of the Nile in Egypt and the Indus in southern Asia. The rebellion also spread into Mediterranean Europe with little difficulty because of the similarities in climate and soil; between 6000 and 5000 B. C. , Greece and the southern Balkans shifted to an agrarian economy. By 4000 B. C. , agriculture was established in numerous areas around the Medit erranean. It took another millennium or two for Mediterranean crops and animals to widen successfully to northwestern Europe.The Neolithic method of life arrived in Britain, for example, no earlier than about 4700 B. C (Rodney Castleden, 1993). By that time, a different kind of Neolithic transformation had already begun to progress on the shores of the new bays and estuaries formed by the flooding that accompanied the end of the last ice age. As temperatures quickly rose to something approximating their present levels, the mile-thick ice melted and sea levels rose radically. Over a span of 2,000 years, almost half of Western Europe was immersed.Britain and Ireland became islands, cut off from the mainland by the recently formed English Channel and Irish Sea. The rising waters created frequent bays and estuaries along the new coastline, and these new ecosystems established to be rich sources of marine life for human consumption. Lured by the easy accessibility of new protein sources, Stone Age Europeans began to settle down in semi sedentary communities. Instead of staying continually on the move, they established base camps near the coast, from which they could endeavor forth to hunt large game when the fishing seasons were poor.A fairly similar change took place in newly created coastal areas of North America, including, for instance, on the shores of Chesapeake Bay. About three thousand years after agriculture began in Mesopotamia, that is, about 6000 B. C. , the Neolithic Revolution began independently in two other distant sites: along the Yellow River in China and in the tropical highlands of Mesoamerica. In China, several kinds of millet were reclaimed by 6000 B. C. , the first villages arose in the Yellow River area by 5500 B. C. , and rice was domesticated in the Yangtze area by 5000 B. C (Peter Rowley-Conwy, 1993).From China, the Neolithic culture spread to Korea, where it gradually became combined over four or five millennia from 6000 B. C. to about 2 000 B. C. In Japan, a foraging culture known as Jomon, which had succeeded from about 10,000 B. C. , gradually gave way to a wet rice culture in the southwest abruptly before the beginning of the Christian era and in the northeast a millennium later. As the Neolithic revolution took place in the so-called nuclear areas in western and Southeast Asia about ten thousand years ago or earlier, and later, independently, in central America.Although the Neolithic rebellion refers to a complex of several significant innovations, the two key evolutionary events to change human history were the domestication of animals and the cultivation of plants. From the centers of these modernizations, knowledge diffused out over the face of earth to most people (Robley Matthews, Douglas Anderson, Robert Chen, and Thompson Webb, 1990). While the cultivation of plants became established as the predominant way of life in the form of agriculture, an event typically accompanied by the domestication of animals , a diverse form of life emerged.The village became the unit of life. This is what sociologists and anthropologists believe being a major way of life in human history, in sharp contrast to modern, industrialized, urban, and complex society. Many names have been coined in order to refer to the customary, agricultural societies that filled most of our written history. By and large, sociologists and anthropologists concur as to the characteristics of agricultural society, and they use different names to explain the same thing.According to them, agricultural society is tradition-oriented; its people are controlled by informal sanctions such as rumor; social relationships are intimate and personal; there is modest division of labor, social structure is rigid with clear class differences; and people are ethnocentric and suspicious of outsiders (Richard MacNeish, 1992). The culture of such society might be described as relatively homogeneous, because the village is more or less self-relian t and excludes outsiders.In exceptional cases, there might be a racial or ethnic minority within or near the village. But because of rigid social distinctions mostly in the form of class differences, contact with them is relatively limited and is more formal, essentially in connection with trade and business transactions. Certainly, compared with the circumstances before the Neolithic revolution, cultural variation within society was likely to be greater and physical deviation as well, once there was the possibility for contact with other racial or ethnic groups.This meant, further, that the possibility for psychological difference became greater, compared with people before the Neolithic revolution. It is plausible that the observation of cultural variation as seen in class and occupational differences in the village as well as that of physical disparity in the form of racial or ethnic differences might have created a greater range of psychological responses among members of a vill age. But there was also a built-in mechanism to offset this in agricultural society.The strong pressure for conformity by means of informal sanctions based on confronting each other contact made psychological variation very difficult. Also, the firm structure of agricultural society kept the appearance of the feeling of relative deprivation, for example, to a minimum. while no possibility for achievement or change was visible, people were not likely to feel deprived, even when they saw the system as excessive. Thus, despite the probable for greater variations in physical, psychological, and cultural dimensions, life in agricultural society was comparatively homogeneous.The economy of peasant life is not productive, because land is typically limited, and, furthermore, land becomes increasingly limited as the population expands and the soil deteriorates. In interpersonal relationships, a peasant presumes that friendship, love, and affection are limited. As a result, a peasant must avo id showing excessive favor or friendship. Sibling rivalry is caused as even maternal love is limited. A husband is jealous of his son and angry with his wife for the similar reason. Health, too, is limited in extent.Blood is nonregenerative. Blood may be equated with semen, and the exercise of masculine vivacity are seen as a permanently debilitating act. Sexual moderation and the evasion of bloodletting are important. Even a woman's long hair may become a source of trepidation because she may lose her vigor and strength by having long hair. Honor and manliness, too, exist in inadequate quantities. Real or imagined insults to personal honor should be vigorously counterattacked because honor is limited, and a peasant cannot afford to lose it.While good things in the environment are assumed to be limited, and when personal gain can only take place at the expense of others, the maintenance of the status quo is the most sensible way to live, because to make economic development or to ac quire a disproportionate amount of good things is a threat to the stability of the community. Stability is sustained by an agreed-upon, socially acceptable, preferred norm of behavior, and sanctions and rewards are used to make certain that real behavior approximates the norm.As a consequence, there is a strong desire to look and act like everyone else and to be subtle in position and behavior. For the same reason, a peasant is reluctant to accept leadership roles. The ideal peasant strives for restraint and equality in his or her behavior. If a peasant should behave excessively, then gossip, slander, viciousness, character assassination, witchcraft or the threat of it, and even actual physical hostility is used by the rest of society against such a person.It is hard to say to what extent this generalization pertains to people after the Neolithic revolution and before the industrial revolution. In numerous agricultural societies, physical and cultural variations were likely to be si gnificantly greater than in hunter-gatherer societies. Yet if people were infatuated with the belief of â€Å"limited good† and thought and behaved like everyone else, their psychological deviations might not have been much greater than those amongst hunter-gatherers. Work Cited †¢ Anne Birgitte Gebauer and T.Douglas Price, eds. , Transitions to Agriculture in Prehistory, Monographs in World Archeology No. 4 ( Madison, Wisconsin: Prehistory Press, 1992). †¢ Charles Heiser, Seed to Civilization: The Story of Food ( Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1990). †¢ Daniel Zohary and Maria Hopf, Domestication of Plants in the Old World, second edition ( Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994), Chapter 11, esp. pp. 238-239. †¢ Kathleen Kenyon, â€Å"Ancient Jericho,† in Ancient Cities: Scientific American Special Issue ( 1994), pp. 20-23.†¢ Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza and Francesco Cavalli-Sforza, The Great Human Diaspora: The History of Diversity and Evolution, trans. by Sarah Thorne ( Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley, 1995). †¢ Peter Rowley-Conwy, â€Å"Stone Age Hunter-Gatherers and Farmers in Europe,† in Goran Burenhult, ed. , People of the Stone Age: Hunter-Gatherers and Early Farmers ( New York: HarperCollins, 1993), pp. 59-75. †¢ Richard MacNeish, The Origins of Agriculture and Settled Life ( Norman, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press, 1992).Chapter 1. p. 5. †¢ Robley Matthews, Douglas Anderson, Robert Chen, and Thompson Webb, â€Å"Global Climate and the Origins of Agriculture,† in Lucile Newman et al. , eds. , Hunger in History: Food Shortage, Poverty, and Deprivation ( Oxford: Blackwell, 1990), Chapter 2. †¢ Rodney Castleden, The Making of Stonehenge ( London and New York: Routledge, 1993), p. 29. †¢ Wesley Cowan and Patty Jo Watson, eds. , The Origins of Agriculture: An International Perspective ( Washington, D. C. : Smithsonian Institution Press, 1992)