Kant V. Mill Essay Example for Free

Kant V. Mill Essay Kantianism and Utilitarianism are two theories that attempt to answer the moral nature of human beings. Immanuel Kants moral system is based on a belief that reason is the final authority for morality. John Stuart Mills moral system is based on the theory known as utilitarianism, which is based upon utility, or doing what produces the greatest happiness. One of Kants lasting contributions to moral philosophy was his emphasis on the notion of respect for persons. He considers respect for persons (a. k. a the Kantian respect) to be the fundamental moral principle of ethical philosophy. His Kantianism premise is a deontological moral theory which claims that the right action in any given situation is determined by the categorical imperative, which he calls the Supreme Principle. This imperative is a command that applies to all rational beings independent of their desires. It is a command that reason tells us to follow no matter what (P. 31). Kant considers this an objective law of reason and because it applies to all of us, he calls it a universal practical law for all rational beings. The hypothetical imperative, on the contrary, is a conditional command, which we have reason to follow if (it) serve(s) some desire of ours (P. 31). For example, if you want X, then you will do Y, whereas with the categorical imperative, X has nothing to do with why you do Y. Kants categorical imperative is a tri-dynamic statement of philosophical thought. In order to determine the morality of the Hill case from Kants perspective, it is vital to understand the formulations that accompany the categorical imperative. Kant upheld systematic laws as the model of rational principles. A characteristic of systematic laws is that they are universal, such as the law that when heated, gas will expand. Kant thought that moral laws or principles must have universality to be rational. He derives the categorical imperative out of the notion that we should be willing to adopt those moral principle that can be universalized, that is, those which we can imagine that everyone could act upon or adopt as their principle. Thus, the first formulation of the categorical imperative is, Never act in such a way that I could not also will that my maxim should be a universal law (P.31). By maxim, he means the rule or principle on which you act. Consider the example Kant gives of giving a false promise. Making false promises is wrong and therefore could not be a universal law, because every rational being would not adopt this as a principle of action. In the Hill case, if Paul Hill kills the doctor than it is morally permissible for everyone else to kill someone they disagree with. Therefore, Hills actions were not justified, because killing cannot be a universal law. Kant also believes that human beings have unconditional worth. In his passage of, The Ultimate worth of Persons, he says: Now, I say, man and, in general, every rational being exists as an end in himself and not merely as a means to be arbitrarily used by this or that will. In all his actions, whether they are directed to himself or to other rational beings, he must always be regarded at the same time as an end. What we treat as having only a relative value as a means . . . are consequently called things. Rational beings, on the other hand, are called persons because their nature already marks them out as ends in themselves, that is, as something which ought not to be used merely as a means. Such a being is thus an object of respect and, so far, restricts all (arbitrary) choice. The practical imperative will therefore be as follows: Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own or in that of another, as an end and never as a means only (P. 32). According to Kant, as rational beings, we are self-directed beings. We experience ourselves and others as intrinsically valuable, as valuable as an end and not merely instrumentally valuable or valuable as a means to obtaining something. According to this second formulation of the categorical imperative, we should treat people with fundamental dignity and respect. For instance, it would be wrong to make false promises because we would be treating others as merely a means and not respecting them as persons with intrinsic value. In order to avoid misunderstanding Kant, it is crucial to distinguish between treating someone as a means to an end and treating them merely as a means to an end. In a complex network of social relationships, we use other people all the time as means to our ends without dehumanizing them. For instance, we use the services of certain people to deliver our newspapers, groceries, and mail. Students use professors as tools to become educated and earn degrees. By contrast, when you use someone merely as a means only, it is abusive and lacks respect for that person. The abuse of that person shows that you do not believe they have value apart from his or her immediate use. Kant believed that human beings occupy a special place in creation. Human beings have dignity, because they are rational agents, capable of making their own decisions and guiding their conduct by reason. Therefore, we have the duty of being good to all persons. In the Hill case, Paul cannot kill the doctor, because according to Kant, in virtue of being a person the doctor had rights, dignity, and intrinsic moral worth, as well as value. Hence, killing the doctor would be the wrong thing to do and through Kant that action is not morally justified, since the moral law demands that we treat others as ends in themselves, and never as mere means to other ends. In other words, you should always treat other rational beings (persons) as having absolute moral worth, or as the ultimate ends of action. ? This I will call the principle of autonomy of the will in contrast to all other principles which I accordingly count under heteronomy (P. 33). The moral will is the only truly autonomous will. Only by following the absolute dictates of reason (which is the source of will) do we arrive at the moral law, since will is a kind of reason, following the dictates of reason means following the dictates of will itself. Because we are subject only to the laws of our reason, he says, we are autonomous beings. And our autonomy gives us dignity and worth beyond all price. Due to our priceless dignity and worth, all persons are worthy of respect. An immoral will would not be autonomous since it would violate itself, the law it gives to itself. The immoral will is heteronomous. If you pursue ends that are not the ultimate ends (the absolute dignity of persons), your actions are ruled by something other than the true (rational) form of will. You might be ruled by passion, by desire, by the wish for happiness, etc. , but whatever it is, it is not self-rule by reason. Therefore, Paul cannot kill the doctor, because in doing so, he will be violating the inherent worth and dignity of persons. A rational being belongs to the realm of ends as a member when he gives universal laws in it while also himself subject to these laws? (P. 33) By this, I believe he means that Paul Hill cannot kill the doctor, because that will make him a hypocrite. He is strongly against abortion, which is the killing of the fetus who is a person from the moment of conception. Therefore, it is wrong for him to kill the doctor, because in doing so, he will be going against his own belief of taking life. Unlike Kant, John Stuart Mill believed in an ethical theory known as utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is another theory in which the main objective is to explain the nature of ethics and morality. There are many formulations to this theory. Utilitarianism is based upon utility, or doing what produces the greatest happiness. It states that the actions of a person should be based upon the greatest happiness principle. This principle states that ethical actions command the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Mills main point is that one should guide his or her judgments by what will give more pleasure. He believes that a person should always seek to gain pleasure and reject pain. So, the formulation is that the morality of an act can be held upright if the consequence produces the greatest overall utility for everyone who may be directly or indirectly affected by the action. Utilitarianism focuses on the consequences of an act rather than on the intrinsic nature of the act or the motives of the agent. So Hills killing of the doctor is morally justified based on it bringing Hill pleasure and eliminating the pain he inflicted on the fetuses. Mill states that some kinds of pleasure are more desirable and more valuable than others and that it would be absurd that while in estimating all other things, quality is considered as well as quantity, the estimation of pleasures should be supposed to depend on quantity alone. Therefore, if Paul kills the doctor, he only took away two lives (quantity), which is less than those that would have been lost if the doctor would have continued performing abortions (quantity). However, Mill states that doing ? as you would be done by and ? lov(ing) your neighbor as yourself constitute the ideal perfection of utilitarian morality. He also says that the thoughts of the most virtuous man need not on these occasions travel beyond the particular persons concerned, except so far as is necessary to assure himself that he is not violating the rights, this is the legitimate and authorized expectations, of anyone else. Both of these statements do not justify Hills actions because he should have loved the doctor and he should not have violated the doctors rights. Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism both attempt to explain how one can go about acting ethically, however they differ in how they measure morality and in the use of rules. Kantianism says that an act is deemed moral if it is done for the sake of duty and if its maxim can be willed as a universal law. Kantianism can therefore be seen as a rational and logical theory in which decisions can be made. Utilitarianism, on the other hand, would only see the act as morally permissible if the consequences of that action produce maximum utility and happiness for all involved. Utilitarianism has no universal set of rules on to which morality is based. In assessing the two moral theories, I believe that Kantianism provides a more plausible account of ethics. Kantianism is more consistent of a theory and can be universally applied to all beings. It is more plausible because even if the consequences of performing an action are not necessarily the best, the agent is still obligated to perform the action because it is there duty to do so. Therefore, ethically and morally they are doing the right thing. In conclusion, this paper has discussed two main theories regarding the ethical behavior of human beings. Kantianism is a theory based on duties, maxims, willing and the categorical imperative. Also, it focuses on the motivation of actions, has clear and distinct set of universal rules, and is morally logical. On the other hand, Utilitarianism is based on the concept that we ought to do whatever produces the greatest overall utility and this will be the morally right action. Furthermore, it relies on the consequences of an action, has no set universal laws as each action is assessed on an individual basis, and morality is based on the results of the assessment. Because of these reasons, I believe that Kantianism is the more ethically plausible theory of the two.

Cyberpunk Through Shadowrun :: Literature Science Fiction Writing Essays Papers

Cyberpunk Through Shadowrun Works Cited Missing Cyberpunk has suffered through many definitions during its growth, from author Bruce Sterling's original assessment in the preface to Mirrorshades to his latest appraisal of the movement in his article, "Cyberpunk in the Nineties." Throughout its evolution, some consistent points have been made that one can mold together to form a definition of cyberpunk: a sense of bleakness, technology's dominant effect on the world, and a tendency to showcase the illegal points within the culture. If these three traits truly define the cyberpunk genre, then the Shadowrun Role Playing System, created by FASA Corporation in 1989, exemplifies these elements of cyberpunk. Shadowrun and cyberpunk fiction are very similar in their view of the future world they present. As Sterling points out in "Cyberpunk in the Nineties," "There is much bleakness in cyberpunk, but it is an honest bleakness. There is ecstasy, but there is also dread"(Browning 6). An interesting point, but not one without merit. For indeed, cyberpunk does tend to forward the sentiment that the world spirals ever downward, to an end that no one can foresee. Tom Maddox's "Snake Eyes" embodies this point, with George's slow and continuous fall toward insanity as the machinery in his head attempts to control him. Shadowrun's chronology is very similar in this respect, from the physical plagues that rip through the world, thereby destroying over a third of the world population, to intense computer viruses that have the ability to kill people who access the data they protect. Many of the governments of the world have disbanded, including the United States -- who joins with Canada -- and Russia . Cities have become known as "sprawls" where only the strong survive, and even then it's a rough outing anytime you step out the door. The bleakness of the world plays into the hands of the shadowrunners, who live in the world of the `sinless,' those who are not registered in the world database. They find the world desolate and anarchistic, but still manage to find profit in it while keeping their skin in one piece. One quote from the Shadowrun sourcebook says, "If you did it and lived, then you probably did it right"(Shadowrun 54). One way that shadowrunners find profit through their activities and survive is through the use of technologically superior tools. Technology, according to Sterling, is also a powerful part of the cyberpunk genre. As he states in Mirrorshades, ". Cyberpunk Through Shadowrun :: Literature Science Fiction Writing Essays Papers Cyberpunk Through Shadowrun Works Cited Missing Cyberpunk has suffered through many definitions during its growth, from author Bruce Sterling's original assessment in the preface to Mirrorshades to his latest appraisal of the movement in his article, "Cyberpunk in the Nineties." Throughout its evolution, some consistent points have been made that one can mold together to form a definition of cyberpunk: a sense of bleakness, technology's dominant effect on the world, and a tendency to showcase the illegal points within the culture. If these three traits truly define the cyberpunk genre, then the Shadowrun Role Playing System, created by FASA Corporation in 1989, exemplifies these elements of cyberpunk. Shadowrun and cyberpunk fiction are very similar in their view of the future world they present. As Sterling points out in "Cyberpunk in the Nineties," "There is much bleakness in cyberpunk, but it is an honest bleakness. There is ecstasy, but there is also dread"(Browning 6). An interesting point, but not one without merit. For indeed, cyberpunk does tend to forward the sentiment that the world spirals ever downward, to an end that no one can foresee. Tom Maddox's "Snake Eyes" embodies this point, with George's slow and continuous fall toward insanity as the machinery in his head attempts to control him. Shadowrun's chronology is very similar in this respect, from the physical plagues that rip through the world, thereby destroying over a third of the world population, to intense computer viruses that have the ability to kill people who access the data they protect. Many of the governments of the world have disbanded, including the United States -- who joins with Canada -- and Russia . Cities have become known as "sprawls" where only the strong survive, and even then it's a rough outing anytime you step out the door. The bleakness of the world plays into the hands of the shadowrunners, who live in the world of the `sinless,' those who are not registered in the world database. They find the world desolate and anarchistic, but still manage to find profit in it while keeping their skin in one piece. One quote from the Shadowrun sourcebook says, "If you did it and lived, then you probably did it right"(Shadowrun 54). One way that shadowrunners find profit through their activities and survive is through the use of technologically superior tools. Technology, according to Sterling, is also a powerful part of the cyberpunk genre. As he states in Mirrorshades, ".

‘Paradise Lost’

Paradise Lost begins and ends with Man, but this is not Man as we know him in daily life, nor indeed as he is usually depicted in literature, but a perfect, pre-lapsarian Man. The primary concern of this epic poem appears to be â€Å"man's first disobedience†2 and the results of that action. However, although Milton uses the word â€Å"man†, it is universally understood that it was not a man, but a woman who disobeyed God and brought about the downfall of the human race. This woman is Eve. Diane Kelsey McColley in her book Milton's Eve asserts that the â€Å"story of our first parents shows woman as flesh, passions, nature, and sexuality seducing man as soul, reason, spiritual virtue and contemplation from his proper relation to God†.3 The portrayal of Eve as primordial temptress is a long-standing one and can be found not only discursively in literary history but also pictorially in art history, and these traditions are perhaps accountable for the reductive opinion of Eve today. Before Paradise Lost, literary accounts of the Fall interpreted the story as male virtue undone by female concupiscence and masculine reason undermined by feminine passion. This blame for Eve as Adam's inferior perhaps originates from the source of the story, the book of Genesis. When God discovered that the apple had been eaten, He inquired of Adam whether he had eaten from the tree of knowledge. Unquestionably accepting his answer that the blame should be heaped on Eve, for it was she who had given it to him, He then proceeded to accuse her for the disobedience: â€Å"And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done?† (Genesis 3:13) 4 This accusation is directed only at Eve, as God assumes Adam's view that she is the one to blame. When the Lord comes to dealing with punishment for their actions, it would appear that Adam's wrongdoing was primarily in the fact that he listened to and obeyed his wife, as this action is the one God stresses firstly and unnecessarily; with the eating of the apple – and thus the contravening of His law – coming as a secondary citation for punishment: â€Å"And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten from the tree†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Genesis 3:17) 5 It may be surprising that even after the easing of patristic restrictions on women's liberty resulting from the Reformation, Puritan and moderate Anglican writers still continued to echo the reductive view of Eve and therefore women in general. Such a case is John Donne, who draws on the established authority of the Bible and shares such opinions as: â€Å"†¦ye wives, be in subjection to your husbands;†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (I Peter 3:1) â€Å"†¦ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (I Peter 3:7)6 The idea that women are â€Å"weaker†, secondary beings who lack in some way the virtues and the higher intellect of men, is reinforced as an established idea by Aristotle's statement that the female is â€Å"a deformity†¦of nature†¦perhaps rather bad than good†, and Plato's that men are reborn as women if they have been â€Å"cowards or led unrighteous lives†.7 It is perhaps a result of these ingrained ideas, that painters and poets have rarely captured what Milton dwells on in his epic, the innocent pre-lapsarian lives of Adam and Eve, and instead have focused on the temptation and downfall of the first man and woman and its symbols – Adam, Eve, the serpent and the tree. Within these portraits, there can be found many depictions of Eve. She is predominantly wanton in one, and yet frailly dignified in another; but in all can be found an emphasis on her fantastic beauty, which is presented as a glorious attribute and yet a cunning snare – ultimately the source of the loss of the paradisal garden she embodies. McColley discusses some examples of this iconographic tradition in her book, including Raphael's ceiling fresco, Stanza della Segnatura.8 The tree of knowledge stands between Adam and Eve, literally and symbolically the object that divides them. Encircling this instrument of division is the catalyst of the Fall, the serpent, half-hidden in the shade of the tree. Adam, half-sitting, gazes at the tree with his palm outstretched, mirroring Eve's gesture. However, she is standing upright in the dominant position, openly gazing at him with a knowing look full of concupiscence and temptation. It is difficult to observe from the print in the book, but McColley states that not only is the serpent â€Å"half woman; it is a shadowed Eve: the same half-turned face, straight nose, bowed mouth, and rounded breasts, the same hair†¦waved back over the left shoulder and hanging loose on the right, each grasping a limb of the tree, their heads nearly touching, and each bending on Adam the same provocative gaze.†9 This image of Eve as the beautiful and debilitating seductress, akin with the serpent, represents the dark and dangerous side of the Fall and of Eve herself. This representation suggests to the viewer, by linking beauty and sexuality with the Fall, that Eve's qualities were inherently corruptive. If this is the case – and I do not necessarily believe this to be true – then the God who created her and gave her to Adam to be â€Å"fit help†(VIII: 450),10 would be, as the fallen Adam claims, baiting a trap. To see Milton's Fall as the central action of the poem in this way, with pre-conceived ideas of sin and blame falling on Eve's head, would be to see and stress the darkest and most sinister side of each image and allusion that Milton makes. However, if we regard creation and the regeneration of life after the Fall as just, if not more, important, then we shall see patterns of positive and redeeming features in Eve's behaviour and be able to foresee possible redem ption and regeneration. The main areas of contention which surround and shape the ideas both of how Eve is perceived, and her role in the Fall, are her relationship to and separation from Adam, her behaviour during the temptation, and whether she was in a sense ‘fallen' before the event itself. Eve, made from a rib of Adam, is traditionally seen as his inferior, â€Å"not equal, as their sex not equal seemed† (IV: 296)11 and her servitude justified on the basis that Adam is â€Å"for God only, she for God in him† (IV: 299)12. However, although this is echoed in the Bible's â€Å"bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh†,13 it could be said that the direct distinction in these quotations between Adam's hierarchical position and that of Eve's is only described by the narrator's voice depicting what Satan saw. To analyse the statement in this way then, is to question the validity of Satan's observations and whether his definition of Adam and Eve is to be trusted as correct, and to question whether the narrator is in part responsible for reflecting the expectations of his audience.14 In pre-lapsarian scenes, Milton shows that Eve has a growing sense of responsibility as her understanding of the opportunities of her calling becomes greater. This is evident in her conversational language which combines questioning, reflection, wit and gaiety: â€Å"†¦we in our appointed work employed Have finished happy in our mutual help And mutual love, the crown of all our bliss †¦and this delicious place For us too large†¦ But thou hast promised from us two a race To fill the earth, who shall with us extol Thy goodness infinite†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (IV: 726-734) 15 Even her choice of love for Adam over the narcissistic self-love she revelled in when first in the Garden, and her faithful toil for the God who created her reveals her virtues as a strong, determined, generous and selfless person, so why not, therefore, worthy of being Adam's equal? Although there appears to be an insistence – despite some evidence to the contrary – on the essential masculine authority of Adam, the reader should not be blinded to the fact that Eve is as necessary to Adam's fulfilment as he is to hers. They naturally complement each other and without the other neither would be complete: â€Å"For contemplation he and valour formed, For softness she and sweet attractive grace† (IV: 297-8)16 This complementary nature could even be seen to stretch to a mutual need and dependency: â€Å"†¦I†¦. †¦enjoying thee Pre-eminent by so much odds, while thou Like consort to thyself canst nowhere find.† (IV: 445-48)17 However, this argument is perhaps most reinforced by the narrator's first description of the pair, when Eve is included in all the valued qualities usually solely attributed to Adam: â€Å"Two of far nobler shape erect and tall, Godlike erect, with native honour clad In naked majesty seemed lords of all, And worthy seemed, for in their looks divine The image of their glorious Maker shone, Truth, wisdom, sanctitude severe and pure†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (IV: 288-293)18 This sharing of attributes and the responsibilities inherent to God's first man and woman are also illustrated by the clear parallel of Adam having the power to name the animals (VIII: 350-354) and Eve possessing an equal power to name the flowers (XI: 277). The first parents, as an equal couple, â€Å"perfectly incarnate the proper relations and actions of the two sexes†19. The idea that pre-lapsarian Adam and Eve had a sexual relationship causes much debate amongst critics. Whether such intimate relations were appropriate for the innocent and perfect pair is debatable, but I believe that pure love such as theirs cannot possibly be inappropriate, and that a lack of sexual love would indicate a flaw in their relationship. God created them to be the mother and father of mankind, to ensure continued renewal of life on earth, and so it is with His ‘permission' that they make love: â€Å"Be fruitful, multiply, and fill the earth†¦Ã¢â‚¬  1 (VII: 531) 20 Fertility in Hell is a curse rather than a blessing; it produces tormenting monsters that feed on their mothers' womb, but conversely, fertility is everywhere in Heaven. The reader can â€Å"apprehend it in the light, the fountains, the rivers, the flowers, the dances, and the songs†.21 Raphael tells Adam that the angels, the intermediaries between Man and God, contain within them â€Å"every lower faculty† (V: 410)22 which enables them to enjoy sexual relations themselves: â€Å"Let it suffice thee that thou know'st Us happy, and without love no happiness. †¦we enjoy †¦and obstacle find none Of membrane, joint, or limb, exclusive bars: Easier than air with air, if Spirits embrace, Total they mix, union of pure with pure Desiring†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (VIII: 620-628) 23 This is an example of a purer and loftier union than that of Man, but represents the transcendence of human love between a man and woman, thus rendering it ‘appropriate', natural and credible. When placed in the context of Milton's beliefs and the politics of the times, his conviction that there could be no paradise for man without sexual love seems personal and original. But in doing so, he attacks not only the â€Å"conventional idea that sexual intercourse was a result, (if not a cause) of the Fall, but also prostitution, the Catholic tradition of clerical celibacy, the fashionable tradition of playing with love, and the entire literary tradition of the lyric poet as abject suitor to his disdainful mistress†24. He may be making a political point, but I believe such an idea is fitting and vitally symbolic. They enjoy fertility as ripe as that of the lush Garden which provides them with sustenance, and were created to continue the cycle of Life on Earth, as they themsel ves help to maintain the cycle of Life in Eden. God's instructions to Adam and Eve to tend the garden are used by Milton to explain Eve's temptation when they are separated. This unquestionably gives her a sense of responsibility for the events which take place, but to what extent is a vital source of debate. Adam can be seen to treat Eve as a free being, dissuading her with lucid arguments, rational warnings, and loving tenderness, but he does not constrain her against her will: â€Å"Well hast thou motioned†¦. Yet not so strictly hath our Lord imposed Labour†¦ †¦but if much converse perhaps Thee satiate, to short absence I could yield†¦. But other doubt possesses me, lest harm Befall thee severed from me;†¦ †¦leave not the faithful side That gave thee being†¦ Who guards her, or with her the worst endures.† ( IX: 229-269) 25 A skilled rhetorician, Adam tries to the best of his ability to dissuade her from her decision to divide their labours, but to no avail. Eve, with a determined, â€Å"the willinger I go†26, withdraws from him and continues alone. Perhaps Adam's failure to restrain her forcibly is the root cause of the Fall? Ultimately no one can say, but nevertheless I believe this question to be a valid one, if only owing to the last line of the above quotation. The words are filled with poignancy and foreshadowings of the tragedy to come for the knowing reader, and such a line from Milton is surely expected to reflect the ironic seriousness of Adam's unknowing promise. Therefore, this clearly should cast doubt into the reader's mind as to whether it was Adam as the too-trusting husband who is to blame for not enforcing Eve's expected subjugation to his will, and allowing the possibility of the temptation to actually occur. Eve's behaviour during the temptation and the question of whether she was already ‘fallen' before the event are often inter-linked and become symptoms of each other. The occurrence of her dream and her reaction to it is also an integral part of this issue. E.M.W. Tillyard in the essay ‘The Crisis of Paradise Lost' asserts that Eve has already ‘fallen' before the Fall, by referring to her dream, saying: â€Å"..into the mind of angel or man evil may enter, and, if it is repudiated, fail to incriminate. In the abstract the doctrine may be tenable, but it cannot work in concrete literary presentation. No human being can conceive or represent evil entering a mind quite alien to it†¦ the mere fact of entrance implies some pre-existing sympathy†¦ Eve†¦ does by her symptoms imply that it has touched her†¦Ã¢â‚¬ 27 One could argue that Tillyard's assertion of human being's behaviour is not applicable to Eve as both she and Adam are, as I have already stated, not humans as we know them – but there is also another line of argument to counter this. It could be said that Milton has built into his poem a sustained distinction between pre- and post-lapsarian nomenclature, and it is this device which aids the reader in distinguishing certain features of Adam and Eve's character to illustrate how they have changed from pre-lapsarian innocence into the post-lapsarian, fallen creatures they will become. This also creates an obvious echo between parallel yet contrasting events before and after the Fall. Adam himself describes Eve as â€Å"crooked by Nature† (X: 885) 28, implying that Eve was in fact ‘fallen' before the eating of the fruit, but this is in the post-lapsarian phase of the poem, and his language has deteriorated from the perfect, pure communication he possessed before the Fall into a dualistic, anti-feminine diatribe. This fact could be seen to reduce the credibility of his words, as he no longer holds the power that is associated with his previous ‘Adamic' language. One could agree with the fallen Adam's assessment of Eve, by citing the many comparisons Milton makes between her and infamous temptresses from classical myth. However, not only do the aforementioned goddesses have innocent aspects as patronesses of natural fertility, (just like Eve in Eden), this reductive portrayal by Milton would commit a terrible blasphemy, contradicting his faith, by blaming God for her sin because he created her innately flawed. What the reader witnesses throughout the temptation is a contest (unconscious on her part) between Eve and Satan for â€Å"the authority to interpret pre-lapsarian language†29. The serpent first stakes a claim upon Eve's language through the seeming miracle of being capable of speech: â€Å"†¦he glad Of her attention gained, with serpent tongue Organic, or impulse of vocal air, His fraudulent temptation thus began.† (IX: 528-5531) 30 The reference to his communication as organic would infer to the reader that it is natural, and the language of pre-lapsarian Eden. However, although Eve is seduced by this into believing it to be true, the reader alone – owing to the description of it as an â€Å"impulse of vocal air† – knows it to be false. The reason this is so is because Satan already has the knowledge of good and evil, and is therefore incapable of the untainted speech of Eve. In this way, therefore, I do not believe that Eve can be seen as already ‘fallen', for without a previous acquisition of ‘knowledge' Eve could not realise that the words of the serpent were that of an evilly corrupted version of her own. Eve's wonder at this apparent ‘miracle' creates a dangerous moment for Satan, one in which he must exercise special vigilance. However, it is an opportunity she misses, and he turns it into his advantage by attributing his power to the forbidden fruit. In the world of Eden, where Adam's birthright of the power to name the animals with a pure and natural speech conveys enormous power, language is knowledge and this is how Satan gains his power. Temptation was not a new idea for Milton. He wrote a Puritan masque, originally entitled A Masque Presented at Ludlow Castle, 1634, but popularly known as Comus. The theme of the masque is â€Å"the death of false pagan values when they are opposed by Christian virtues†31, and, like Paradise Lost, is concerned with the process of temptation and the power of evil to corrupt innocence. The vital difference between the two, however, is that the central female character, The Lady, does not succumb to the machinations of her would-be tempter: â€Å"COMUS: This will restore all soon†¦ LADY: †¦'Twill not restore the truth and honesty That thou hast banished from thy tongue with lies.† (lns 689-692) 32 It could be said that the reason for Eve to Fall when The Lady does not is that she was innately flawed, a bait for Adam designed by God, or merely an inferior and weak female. I believe however, that the reason for Eve's Fall is to signify redemption and regeneration. Paradise Lost was published in 1667, having been written in a period of great social unrest. The government believed to be God's government by Milton and his fellow Puritans had collapsed in 1660 with the Restoration of Charles II. This raised moral questions which I believe in part to be responsible for Milton's questioning about the â€Å"ways of God† (I: 26)33, and which resulted in the exploration in this poem of a God who does not intervene to stifle evil. The brief image of the labourer returning home after a day's work in the fields at the end of Book XII of Paradise Lost is â€Å"especially effective, a moving evocation of the life and toil and poverty and weariness and also of homely satisfactions – all the common experience of humanity which Adam and Eve must now face†.34 Eve, though fallen, is in the process of regeneration, and, just like the political climate of Milton's era, can resume development of her pre-lapsarian virtues, though now through pain and â€Å"woe† (I: 3).35

How to Form Question Tags in English

Basic questions in English are formed using the auxiliary verb followed by the subject which comes before the main verb. Auxiliary Verb Subject Main Verb Do you live in Poland?How long has she worked at that company? Sometimes we dont really want to ask a question but just want to check information. For example, if you are sure that a friend lives in Seattle but want to check to make sure, you might use a question tag. Tom lives in Seattle, doesnt he? In this case, it isnt necessary to ask a question because you already know the information. Using a question tag helps you confirm that the information you know is correct. Question tags can also change meaning based on how you pronounce the tag at the end of the sentence. If you raise your voice on the question tag you are asking if the information you just stated is indeed correct. Using question tags in this manner helps to make sure that you are doing something correctly, or understand a situation accurately. Here are some examples: A mom buying some jeans for her daughter: You wear size 2, dont you?A friend writing a birthday card to a friend: Peter was born on March 2, wasnt he?A job interviewer checking information on a resume: You havent worked at this company before, have you? At other times, you drop the voice at the question tag. When dropping the voice at the question tag, you indicate that you are confirming information. Here are some examples: Young man filling out a form speaking to his wife: We live on Cherry St, dont we?Friend looking at a calendar with a meeting noted: Were meeting later this afternoon, arent we?Friend speaking to her friend as they walk in the rain: The sun wont shine today, will it? Forming question tags is very easy. Remember that the question tag uses the auxiliary verb in the opposite form of the sentence itself. In other words, if the sentence is positive, the question tag takes the negative form of the auxiliary verb. If the sentence is negative, the question tag employs the positive form. Heres a quick review of principle tenses, the auxiliary form they take, and an example of a positive and a negative question tag for each tense: EXAMPLE 1. Tense: Past Continuous Auxiliary Verb: Was / Were (to be) Positive Sentence Question Tag Example: Andy was working when you arrived, wasnt he? Negative Sentence Question Tag Example: They werent waiting for you, were they? EXAMPLE 2. Tense: Present Perfect Auxiliary Verb: Have / Has (to have) Positive Sentence Question Tag Example: Harry has lived in New York for a long time, hasnt he? Negative Sentence Question Tag Example: We havent visited our friends in Chicago this year, have we? EXAMPLE 3. Tense: Past Perfect Auxiliary Verb: Had (to have) Positive Sentence Question Tag Example: They had finished before he arrived, hadnt they? Negative Sentence Question Tag Example: Jason hadnt already finished before you provided the update, had he? EXAMPLE 4. Tense: Future with Will Auxiliary Verb: Will Positive Sentence Question Tag Example: Tom will think about it, wont he? Negative Sentence Question Tag Example: They wont be able to come to the party, will they? EXAMPLE 5. Tense: Future with Going to Auxiliary Verb: Is / Are / Am (to be) Positive Sentence Question Tag Example: Tom is going to study Russian, isnt he? Negative Sentence Question Tag Example: They arent going to be at the meeting, are they?