Subjetivity Personal Statement Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Subjetivity - Personal Statement Example The situation from my perspective is that the student feels that he is doing the wrong thing practicing truancy. Therefore, he torn between two options, whether to run away or got back to class. After weighing the two options, the student feels that he is being unfair to himself by running away. The punishment he may have to do away with when the teacher finds about the situation or even his parents may can be severe. Therefore, the student decides to go back to class, join the others, and continue learning. The factor that influences subjective experiences in the first case is personal consideration. However, in judging from another person’s perspective in the second case, it is clear that personal opinion about what may be a reality plays a fundamental role. According to Solomon & Barney (2008), perspectives differ from one person to another. Therefore, from the experience, judgmental views depend on the conscience of a person at the time of making

Effictive team and performance management Essay

Effictive team and performance management - Essay Example Challenges such as unsuccessful problem solving, non-functioning team diversities and most common, motivation among the team members are inevitable in a team (Keyes, 2004; p. 1282). In this group, group problems were tackled and embraced accordingly by all responsible team members. A leader or a manager must moderate problem solving. In this respect, the team decided anonymously that I should be their leader. In the entire exercise, the team passed through all phases of team formation inclusive of forming, norming and storming phases (Tuckman, 1965; p. 385). Being a leader is never an easy experience. It becomes even more difficult when one is dealing with a dynamic group. Therefore, I had to use my interpersonal skills such creativity, flexibility, passion and self-competence as put forward by Goleman (2002; p. 251). Concerning passion, I had a feeling that emotional intelligence was instrumental in uniting the team members towards our mission. Concurrently, there are areas where I felt I lacked the necessary knowledge to offer guidance to the team. Hence, I learnt admitting the lack of knowledge or expertise was very significant. Some of the skills I thought I did not possess at all came handy to my surprise. For example, timely arrival and staying patient to the end of a discussion was fundamental during the field exercise. I have known by friends as a poor listener but my team experience gave me a limelight to be the best and active listener. Though there were members who felt they were entitled to dominate the discussion, I was quite equipped in this area. First, I studied their personality and eventually learnt ways of managing them. In fact according to Richard & Lynn (2007; p. 187), studying every group member within the shortest time possible is very essential. Following my experience in this group, I learnt that working towards building trust among team members was significant in managing the group. Taking responsibility for actions is vital in buildi ng trust among the members. To err is human and mistakes committed must be admitted to ensure an amicable solution is achieved. I learnt member’s involvement in different tasks was significant in achieving a formidable solution to the tasks. Likewise, allowing the group to make rules during the lifetime of the group is also very important (Monge & Contractor, 2003; p. 57). In this manner, the group will not feel dictated upon when certain decisions concerning them are to be made. At the time of making the rules, expectations of every team member must be noted with transparency it requires. In addition, it came to my grasp that my expectations of the team members were to be made clear to help build a cohesive team. Most importantly, I felt it was important for my connection with the group. Satisfying the group’s self-interest was a major force in creating strong interpersonal relationships (Laura, 2008; p. 387). I had an obligation to empathize with certain emotional is sues experienced by some of the group members. Ignoring some of the issues, which one may term as ‘petty’, was no constructive at all. Behaving in this manner was liable to the downfall of the team and the whole mission. Driving the mission to success must be the ultimate goal. However, a mission cannot be driven to success when other members are completely lost from the group. I was aware that every member had a right to express his or her plight during

Elements Of Autobiography In Martin Eden By Jack London

Elements Of Autobiography In Martin Eden By Jack London In Londons literary ingenuity, Mark Eden is staged in such a way that it is widely considered a living autobiography for Jack London himself from the resemblance of the various themes and postulates in the book with the authors own perspectives during his life; in fact, so close to Londons perspectives in life are the issues discussed in the book that even the tragic end of Mark Eden taking his own life has been justifiably been surmised to be a foreshadow Jack Londons own death. The Elements of autobiography in Martin Eden by Jack London Martin Eden is a 1909 novel by a once renowned American author who was called Jack London that details a story of a young man that struggles for recognition among the literary elite of his time. In his life and times, social stereotypes and cultural biases abhor interactions between the poor and the bourgeoning rich class which forms one of the struggles that young Martin fights especially considering that he is in love with Roth Morse; a young bourgeois woman from a well off family. This work is a novel creation of superb work of a real literary craftsman which addresses the normal issues of young struggling writers explaining the challenges that they face daily with the publishing of their work. In Londons literary ingenuity, Mark Eden is staged in such a way that it is widely considered a living autobiography for Jack London himself from the resemblance of the various themes and postulates in the book with the authors own perspectives during his life; in fact, so close to Londons perspectives in life are the issues discussed in the book that even the tragic end of Mark Eden taking his own life has been justifiably been surmised to be a foreshadow Jack Londons own death. This essay looks at the book, Mark Eden, with the view of explaining the plot of the book in an attempt of determining how the authors life is reflected in the book. The essay also looks at the various themes discussed in the book and compares them with the ideological views that the author held in his lifetime. In addition to this, the essay also sets out to determine whether there is anything autobiographical about the book in reference to its authors life. These aims will be attained by drawing quotes and inferences from the book to justify postulates and authenticate presuppositions made in this regard. Further corroborative remarks will also be used from different authorities and literature about the same topic to reinforce the credibility of the findings and conclusions herein. This book is a pet favourite among upcoming writers who have faced the reality of the hardship that surrounds publishing their literary works of art. It is a story of a young and courageous Martin Eden who through his determination struggles through self-education in the early 20th century to edge a living for himself and subsequently achieve a footing at the helm of the literary elite of the time. As the story unfolds, it becomes clear thatEdens impetus towards hard work and desire of edging a name for himself among the societal elite is Ruth Morses love. Social stereotypes and societal norms fragrantly denyEden any chance of enjoying a union with Ruth since they are from two different social classes:Eden is from the lower working class of sailors while Ruth is from the higher bourgeois class. For Eden to move himself slightly towards attainment of any of his dreams of happily living with Ruth and earning an honourable living therefore, he must establish himself as a writer which is his life-long dream hence the passionate attempts at having his work published. This is the first place that Martin Eden closely reflects the life of Jack London. The skepticism with which Martin Eden views the publishing houses and publishers is the same cynicism thatLondon viewed publishers with during his formative years as a struggling writer. In effect, there is probably no better way of fully capturing the defiant cynicism thatLondon had in this regard than usingEdens own words: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦he [Eden] speculated that there was no human being in form of an editor to receive his manuscripts when he sent them but rather there was a an smart arrangement of cogs which automatically changed any manuscripts they received from this envelope to another attaching stamps to them then returning them to the sender(s) with a kindly written rejection slip (Berman 67). Edens wars continue but as is the case with all non-quitters, his day of laughter dawns but unfortunately it comes too late soon after his life-long love, Ruth Morse has given up on waiting for him to hit the right button of prosperity. In her impatience, she retorts in frustration to Edenthat à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦had you only settled down in life and attempted to make something for yourself in lifeà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ I would have had reason to hope for the maturity of my love for you (Berman 38). There are authorities who have surmised quite justifiably that the character of Ruth Morse is modeled on Jack Londons first love, Mabel Applegarth who continually rejected Londonfor his apparent failure in life as a young writer (Campbell 145). In this regard also therefore, there is a direct inference from Londons life that is closely associated with Martin Eden making the argument that the book has autobiographical inclinations as plausible as it is justifiable. This notwithstanding, there are substantial differences in the story that do not rhyme at all withLondons convictions during his time. Such an example is the issue of socialism versus individualism as portrayed in the book. From the book,Edenrejects socialism repugnantly considering it slavery and instead hails individualism based on Nietzschean ideology. On the other hand, London is on record to have written to Upton Sinclair discrediting individualism and in his correspondence is quoted to have said that à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦one of my greatest motifs in the book was to ingeniously attack individualism which I reckon I miserably bungled since not even one single reviewer of this book has ever discovered that (London 23). The book ends tragically inEdentaking his own life by drowning himself in water. This came at his best moments when he had attained recognition and his writing had been widely acclaimed which would have implied that he should have gotten the highest satisfaction given that such success is what he craved for in life. As it downed on him, societal gears just swung the other way when he had reached what he had all along considered the zenith of his literary acumen since it downed on him that not even his immense success as a writer would earn him the societal acceptance among the nobility and upper social class. There was always an aurora of discontent and despise from his contemporary artists from the higher social class, something that madly piquedEdenoff. It is this continued disrespect that eventually lured him into taking his own life (London58). In a word, events surrounding Jack Londons death have been closely associated with suicide after Edens manner thereby making the book obnoxiously futuristic pointing to the authors own death (London69). At the age of 33 when London had already attained fame and international acclaim with his previous work of literature (such as White Fang and The Call of the Wild), he quickly got bored with the bourgeoning fame and set out to sail throughout the entire of the Southern Pacific. It was on this voyage that London wrote the book, Martin Eden when he was struggling with lifes frustrations and some bowel illness to which he is thought to have succumbed. In the book,London reiterated his adolescent gangfights, artistic recognition, frustrations and romantic struggles that characterized his humble life. In summary, Martin Eden is a book that is widely considered an autobiography forLondongiven the many futuristic antidotes that it hints which are directly linkable to Jack Londons life. The many struggles in the book inEdens youth hood have direct resemblance with the many struggles thatLondonfought against in his own youth hood further making the book widely autobiographical. Inasmuch as there are some minor differences in the ideological statements made in the book and Londons own perceptions (such as individualism and socialism), it is commonplace for literary forms and therefore does not overtly cloud the pontification of the book as a being autobiographical in nature. It is in this view that Martin Eden is favoured herein as being autobiographical in its entirety. References Berman, P. Introduction to Martin Eden: xv.New York: Random House, 2002. London, Joan. Jack London and His times: An Unconventional Biography.New York: Doubleday. Doran, 1939 p.23 Campbell, Reesman. Prospects for the Study of Jack London Resources for American Literary Study. @Sunsite.Berkeley. Edu, 2001, 145. London, Jack. Martin Eden [M].Beijing Foreign Language Teaching Research Press, 1992.

A Reality In Fiction Essays -- essays research papers

In A Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens contrasts the Manettes’ life during the French Revolution in both London and Paris. The story follows them throughout the trials of the Reign of Terror in Paris, to the safety and security of London. He also compares the cities themselves, one being overrun with poverty and oppression, and the other being safe and economically sound. He shows the differences in the quality of life in both cities, while developing a love story in which the lives of the characters are twisted within the French Revolution. In France before the revolution, many changes had been made to help the country, but the Deficit of Revenue was not one of them. Many of the aristocrats and clergy were exempt from paying taxes, yet the poorer citizens were taxed heavily to make up for it (Carlyle vii). Louis XIV gave the upper class special power and privileges and ultimately caused France to weaken (Wright 31). Soon the common people were poor and starving. France had been suffering inflation for years; therefore, the government tried to tax the upper classes, but they refused to pay since they had been exempt for so long. Soon after, France endured many hardships, including drought and famine, and France became even poorer (Wright 31). In order to reform the financial status of France, Louis summoned the Etates-Generaux, who had not met since 1614. The Etates-Genereaux, or the General States, was a representative assembly that dealt with the matters of the state. It was made up of three groups: the church, the ari stocracy, and the remaining ninety five percent of the population (Wright 33). On July 14, 1789, the French Revolution officially began by the storming of the Bastille. The reason the Bastille was attacked was because it was seen as a symbol of the King’s power (Wright 34). This led to ten years of attacks made upon the privileged because of the abuses the common people felt from the ruling classes. Soon after the Bastille was taken, many other outbursts and riots occurred in France. Many aristocrats’ chateaux were burned, and this era of violence became known as The Great Fear (Wright 33). Many aristocrats and clergy fled the country in fear of being beheaded (Wright 34). Louis was put on trial as a traitor and was executed on January 21, 1793. Many people led revolts and provided the revolutionary ideas that the upper classes feared... ... but his future was clearly in England with his daughter and son-in-law (Kiran-Raw). The harsh conditions of Paris in the story were extremely realistic compared to the actual revolution. The people of Paris were starved and worked to death. They had to work more than they should have had just to pay what the government taxed them. However, in the story, all the revolutionaries were more violent than some of the real revolutionaries. Although there were violent ones, others were also people that had revolutionary ideas and views that could have helped the situation. Those people ended the true revolution.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  A Tale of Two Cities is undoubtedly a realistic, yet fictional account of the French Revolution. Dickens compares and contrasts the lives and events of both London and Paris in a very accurate manner. His intentions of writing to enlighten people of the history of the revolution were successful, while also extremely entertaining. Although it has been thought that Dickens created the characters out of people he actually was associated with, they fit the story properly. The story truly digs into the heart of the revolution and the people it affected.

Discuss and/or compare the role of women in society in`Trifles`and `Death of salesman`

An American woman’s life in the early 1900s when one-act play â€Å"Trifles† was written by Susan Glaspell was a whole lot different than what it is today. During that time, women were expected to stay at home while their husbands go to work and earn a living for their families, a noble task which society deemed fit for men in as much as cleaning house, hanging clothes, cooking food, washing dishes, and taking care of children were noble tasks meant for women. Women were educated, but the education or semblance of which merely served as a superficial credential to make them more attractive potential mates.Society was undoubtedly patriarchal, with wives’ submission to heir respective husbands’ taken both as the norm and the biblical good. (Mitchell 23) It was during this time that Glaspell wrote the play about a murder and that crime’s subsequent solution through a series of trifles. Even at the start of her play, Glaspell showed the disparity of soc ial class between men and women. One example is the scene at the start of the play where the three male main characters enter the warm farmhouse first before the two women do despite the fact that it was freezing cold outside.This signifies the priority that men assert of their needs over the needs of their women. It also signifies a sense of women being beholden to their men, the wives did not complain about the shabby treatment of their husbands of them in the scene, they considered it quite normal to wait until your husband enters a house before you yourself can do so. Another was one of the male characters constant mockeries of female concerns. That character, Mr. Hale, trivialized the many details of the tasks that women in that era were responsible for by using the words â€Å"women are used to worrying about trifles†. By trifles, Mr.Hale meant the small, seemingly nonessential details that his wife and all other wives as can be concluded from his disposition are always fussing over. He complains that his and Mr. Peters’ wives worries about unkempt state, pots, bread, and other kitchen items scattered about, about Mrs. Wright’s preserves being frozen and cracked are of no significance to the problem at hand, which was the murder of Mr. Wright. Here we see that not only were women being expected to be obedient, to stay at home and do the chores, but they were being ridiculed by men for being careful and mindful of the very things that husbands expect their wives to do.Mr. Hale never takes into consideration that it is his wife’s worries over the things that he considers as â€Å"Triffles† that lets him go home to a warm meal and a clean bed every single day, that gives him fresh, neatly ironed clothes every morning and not to mention a home cooked lunch. This mockery and ignorance show how little of a value society at that time actually placed on the tasks of a woman that it has expected of her. Another important detail that could be observed in the play was how women were indeed smarter than men gave them credit for.The wives of the two main characters eventually solve the mystery of the murder where their husbands failed. The women do so through investigating the very same â€Å"trifles† that the men ridicule them for. Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale found the quilting that Mrs. Wright was working on, and takes note that the sudden change in the quality of the stitching may connote that something had happened that upset Mrs. Wright. They found a broken bird cage and wondered if there was a bird, and then finally they found a small box upon looking for sewing supplies to take back to Mrs. Wright.The small box contained a bird with its neck wrung. The women put the clues together and decide not to tell their respective husbands, this last part somewhat connoting their preference to deny their husbands solid proof regarding the murder of Mr. Wright to which Mrs. Wright stood accused. The play portr ayed the men as blind to the clues that the women were able to find, this stressed the inequality between men and women even more, showing that although women could be just as smart as or even smarter than their male counterparts, their roles in society were still below those of their husbands’.The final aspect of the play that is connected with women at that time was the portrayal of Mrs. Wright. From the discussions among the other characters it was apparent that Mrs. Wright lived a stressful existence under the rule of her husband. Her husband was described as a difficult man, and the character of Mrs. Wright was implied to have endured years of abuse because of it. This last portrayal concretizes the marginalization of women during those times.It leaves to the viewers to connect the irony of how a woman who had  been subjected to years of degradation from a man who supposedly vowed to love and cherish her is in danger of suffering one last injustice, to be held intrial for the murder of the very man who had drained the life out of her. Decades later since the first showing of â€Å"Trifles† in 1916, Arthur Miler wrote what would be later known as a classic of American Theater. â€Å"Death Of A Salesman† which was first shown in 1949 was not primarily about women, but about how one man’s delusion and desperation caused the degradation of his family and his dignity.However, this man’s wife who was the main female character in the play showed very vivid portrayals of whether the concept of woman had evolved. Linda’s characterization in the play fares women no better than the women characters in â€Å"Triffles†. Linda Loman from â€Å"Death Of A Salesman† was yet another disheartened housewife who still kept fulfilling the usual tasks due to an American housewife. She is loving, caring, understanding and ever obedient to her husband, Willy Loman who never fails to tell her to â€Å"shut up† whene ver she puts a word out of line.Linda’s insights and intelligence are a lot more that Willy is characterized as having, but her unfaltering devotion towards him prevented her from using her wits to save her family because she knew that such an act would rob her husband of the glory that in that era made men, men. The scenes that involve private conversations with her sons showed Linda’s brilliance and common sense, a common sense that diminishes in scenes of Linda speaking with her husband wherein she plays stupid with her responses usually limited to â€Å"Yes Dear. † or â€Å"what, Dear? †. In conclusion, we say that both plays had feminist ideals embedded in them.Both plays portrayed the injustice being done to women and how these women of the past coped with such injustice. The time between the releases of these two plays connotes the period when these literature were written as struggling times for women. These years marked the birthing of a generati on of women who would finally wise up and begin to take their rightful place in society as men’s equals. The plays were evidence that some women already knew what was happening, and that these women were eager to spread the word of female liberalism which would later be known as feminism.These plays exposed that the treatment of women as housebound cleaners, babysitters, and cooks while at the same time failing to give proper recognition for these tasks and the women who did them was unacceptable. (Mitchell 85) The play showcased a woman’s abilities and strengths despite living in a man’s world. It showed that a woman can and will exceed a man if she chooses to. It scolds the women who have not yet awakened by portraying characters that resemble them. The battered and abused who are the Mrs. Wrights, and the smart, loving and caring yet neglected, unappreciated and frustrated Linda Lohans.These women represent those who cannot fight back, or those who think that what is being done to them is proper. These characters call out to those women and show them how pathetic they’ve become in an attempt to jolt them out of it and make them take a stand. American women have come a long way since these two pieces of literature; they have made countless others and are continuing to make them to date. They have gained much ground in their battle for rights and would do all that they can to push ever harder, reach ever higher, and make it ever clearer that no man has a right to make any woman feel that she is below him.

Francis Bacon and Rene Descartes Essay

The Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting One’s Reason and of Seeking Truth in the Sciences is one of the most influential works in the history of modern philosophy, and important to the evolution of natural sciences. In this work, Descartes tackles the problem of skepticism. Descartes modified it to account for a truth he found to be incontrovertible. Descartes started his line of reasoning by doubting everything, so as to assess the world from a fresh perspective, clear of any preconceived notions. Whereas Francis Bacon’s Scientific Method wanted to replace the deductive reasoning by inductive reasoning. The important concept in this reformed thought is about discovering truth rather than establishing the beliefs by deduction. The scientific and philosophical contributions that Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon helped form a single concept of the scientific method. The scientific method was a new way to reach a conclusion about anything and refers to a way one should acquire knowledge, or investigate a phenomenon or to correct and refine previous unproven knowledge. It is a five step method; the inquiry, initial hypothesis, action of investigation, results and conclusion. Rene Descartes was born in France at La Haye near the city of Tours in 1596. He went to school at the age of eight at La Fleche in France; he was a student there until the age of sixteen, in which he studied scholastic philosophy and mathematics. Later he was educated at the Jesuit College of La Fleche between 1606 and 1614. When he was nineteen he left Jesuit College for the University of Poitiers, where he studied law for two years and graduated in the year 1616. He got a degree in law but developed a passion for mathematics because he saw it as one field where absolute certainty could be found. Descartes also saw it as a means for achieving greater progress in both science and philosophy. He later claimed that his education gave him little of substance and that only mathematics had given him certain knowledge. In 1618-1621 he enlisted in the army, military service was tradition in his family, and when the Thirty Years’ War began he was encouraged to volunteer under the Count de Bucquoy in the Bavarian army. In his leisure time he studied mathematics, having been influenced by the Dutch mathematician and scientist Beeckman. He left the army in 1621 he dedicated his life to the study of science and philosophy (1621-1649). During which time he published his most influential works, by 1650 his health was depleting and he passed away in Stockholm of pneumonia at the age of fifty-three. Francis Bacon was born in London. He entered Trinity College, Cambridge, at the age of twelve. He studied law and became a barrister in 1582; two years later he took a seat in the House of Commons. Bacon’s opposition, in 1584, to Queen Elizabeth’s tax program delayed his political advancement. While in the earlier days he supported the Earl of Essex, Bacon, in 1601, was involved in his prosecution. With the accession of James I (1566-1625) and thereafter, a number of honours were bestowed on Bacon: he was knighted in 1603, made Solicitor General in 1604, Attorney General in 1613, and Lord Chancellor in 1618. He was an English lawyer, statesman, essayist, historian, intellectual reformer, philosopher, and supporter of modern science. Early in his career he claimed â€Å"all knowledge as his province† and afterwards dedicated himself to an extensive revaluation and re-structuring of traditional learning. To take the place of the established tradition a miscellany of Scholasticism, humanism, and natural magic, he proposed an entirely new system based on empirical and inductive principles and the active development of new arts and inventions, a system whose ultimate goal would be the production of practical knowledge. Descartes and Bacon were influenced by 16th century society. What does the situation look like in Europe in terms of science and philosophy in 1500’s? Scholasticism is over in terms of being a philosophical point of view. It is still practiced in some universities and will be practiced up until the 18th century at least. Three fundamental changes have occurred during the Renaissance; Aristotle portrayed the understanding of the universe, Galen described the importance of medicine and to understand astronomy Ptolemy described it. In 200 years there has been a revolutionary change, Rene Descartes and Isaac Newton have replaced Ptolemy in astronomy. Galileo has replaced Aristotle in physics. Harvey has replaced Galen in medicine. The three ancient authorities have been over thrown. In Rene Descartes’ Discourse on Method he expresses his disappointment with traditional philosophy and with the limitations of theology; only logic, geometry and algebra hold his respect, because of the utter certainty which they can offer us. Unfortunately, because they depend on hypotheses, they cannot tell us what is real, i. . what the world is really like. Therefore Descartes suggests a method of thought combining the consistency of mathematics but based on natural truths about what is real, basic knowledge which could not be wrong (like the axioms of geometry). He calls into question everything that he thinks he has learned through his senses but rests his entire system on the one truth that he cannot doubt, namely, the reality of his own mind and the radical difference between the mental and the physical aspects of the world. What is crucial to Descartes is reason because he wants to establish a foundation for the sciences. Reason is a constant for Descartes; he is given credit as starting the modern rationalist school. Rationalists were people who philosophers who felt that every human being possessed ideas about the world that each of us was born with and they were the bases of much of our knowledge. Descartes does tend to rationalism. â€Å"Thus our convictions result from custom and example very much more than from any knowledge that is certain. Look at how we operate as human beings in society. Our beliefs and convictions come from tradition, we believe certain things and act in certain ways, and we are interested in certain things because of the traditions that preceded us. Descartes apposes this to knowledge that is certain, in other words basically he does not have much time for tradition. Beliefs and convictions are not knowledge. Knowledge is something that you can be certain of. When Descartes says knowledge, he means no possibility of doubt at all. Absolute certainty is knowledge and this is what he wanted for his new foundation for the sciences. Certainty is everything, not gut certainty, gut feeling is purely psychological subject feeling. Feeling is not included when referring to certainty, object certainty is certainty is there no matter what your feeling is it is a state of affairs that is there if you like it or not and you know it in such a way that you cannot possibly be mistaken and you cannot possibly doubt it. Descartes criticizes tradition; he says we can’t rely on tradition for true knowledge. In terms of the contemporary world you cannot rely on the point of view of the masses of people when we are trying to deal with or discover new knowledge that might be somewhat difficult to get a handle on. Descartes only relies on one thing mainly and that is his reason. â€Å"I decided to go slowly and to be so careful about everything that, even if I made very little progress, I would at least prevent myself from falling. I did not even wish to begin rejecting completely any of the views that may have slipped among my beliefs previously without having been introduced there by reason. He wants to go slowly and not make mistakes because he is dealing with his own mind and thoughts. When Descartes is considering beliefs he wants only those beliefs that have been checked out by his reason. â€Å"Everything that I accepted as being most true up to now I acquired from the senses or through the senses. However, I have occasionally found that they deceive me, and it is prudent never to trust those who have deceived us, even if only once. † Descartes tries to undermine his beliefs by considering the fact that he remembers that his senses have deceived him before. Descartes’s goal is to suspend judgment about any of his beliefs which are even slightly doubtful. Descartes talks about the three disciplines of mathematics, logic, geometric analysis and algebra. In logic a form of deductive reasoning consisting of a major premise, a minor premise and a conclusion is called a syllogism. Example, Major premise: All men are mortal. Minor premise: Socrates is a man. Conclusion: Therefore Socrates is mortal. The key thing about a syllogism for Descartes is that as an argument form it does not help us learn anything new. Individuals use arguments to establish aspects that are new, that are different from the premises, the example above does not tell an individual something new because all the information is provided within the premises. In deductive logic when all the premises are true and the argument is valid it goes by the rules of logic, than the argument is a sound argument and the truth of the conclusion is guaranteed. Descartes wants a logic that is going to help discover new truths. In the case of syllogisms and most of its other rules are more useful for explaining to someone else what one already knows or even, for speaking uncritically about things that one does not know, rather than for learning them. † Descartes says this logic does not help with discovering a new scientific method and he cannot rely on logic alone to generate a new method. Regarding geometry â€Å"is always so tied to the discussion of shapes that it cannot exercise the understanding without greatly tiring the im agination. † He is happy with the understanding, which for Descartes also means reason. Descartes does not agree with imagination because imagination can get tired while it is conjuring up various images. He is pro understanding and reason but is suspicious of imagination and unfortunately geometry is reliant on imagination and therefore he cannot rely completely on geometry for his new method. Algebra is so constrained by certain rules and symbols that it has become a confused art that hinders the mind rather than a science that assists it. Descartes decides to do it by himself and develop a method on his own. He assembles four basic rules for his method and they also reflect what goes on in basic science in modern day. The first was never to accept anything as true if I did not clearly that it was so. † No subjection bias and jumping to conclusions. Jumping to conclusions is one of the criticisms he makes of some forms of reasoning and jumping to conclusions simply means on the bases of very little data I make a conclusion beyond that data. A modern day example supporting Descartes first rule is to go buy a new car, take the car out for a test drive and drive it for about 10- 20 minutes than decide to buy the car because it is fabulous and it will never have any problems. Descartes says this is hasty reasoning that is drawing a hasty conclusion, in other words you haven’t driven that car enough to make that kind of conclusion about the quality of that car. Analytical is the second rule, the problem that you are dealing with as a scientist. The first thing you do when you confront a problem is to break it down into its parts. In other words what are the elements of this problem? Descartes is saying the best way to solve a problem is to first break it down to analyze it into its smallest sub parts and then attack it. The third rule was reconstruction/reduction. Reduction refers to subject matter, â€Å"to guide my thoughts in an orderly way by beginning with the objects that are the simplest and easiest to know. † In other words you break down the objects to their simplest part which is the reduction and then you reconstruct from the parts of the object. When you are reconstructing you are looking for the internal order of the subject matter. Comprehensiveness is the fourth rule for Descartes’ method. Means to make sure nothing relevant has been left out of consideration. That you have dealt with the entire object and all of its parts and not just some of the object and some of its parts. The bases of his method is that if all inferences that if they result from an argument that has all true premises and follows the rules of logic than the conclusion is necessarily true. This is the possibility of the perfect argument, if one every time someone criticizes you was able to devise an argument that had all true premises and followed the rules of logic one could be assured that the truth of your conclusion every time out was true. At the beginning of his adult life, Francis Bacon aimed at a revision of natural philosophy; he wanted a new system which emphasized empirical methods and laying the foundation for applied science. The apparent difference between Descartes and Bacon, Descartes emphasis was on deduction and reason; Bacon is caught more by empiricisms which mean he believes all our knowledge comes from sense experience. In 1603 Bacon writes the interpretation of nature. Here he opposes Aristotelian thought and purposes a new outline for a new method. Like Descartes he has no use for tradition, for the philosophical tradition and the scientific tradition he has no use for it what so ever. Bacon is saying we need a new start.