AJAX can be termed as a group of interrelated web development methods used on the client-side to create interactive web applications. While using AJAX, data can be retrieved from the servers without interfering with the settings of the current page (Garrett, 2005).

There is no other better language than Ajax this is because of the following: when using AJAX the interface is much more responsive because only a small part of the page is transferred at a time also in a web application, when the web server sends a web page to the browser, it can use multiple connection threads to speed up delivery, Waiting time is reduced, If a page section encounters an error, other sections are not affected and the data already entered by the user is not lost, traffic to and from the server is reduced considerably – because you do not have to send the entire page content the bandwidth usage is most likely to decrease(Garrett, 2005).

AJAX level that is provided is sufficient because Ajax makes applications in the browser truly interactive on a field level, very similar to desktop software, the Ajax application responds immediately to any user action in the browser where needed. An Ajax application behaves and feels like a desktop software in the browser and the “batch feeling” is gone, updating single items (fields) in the browser results in much better user guidance and higher user productivity, with Ajax, the server can ‘push’ data into the browser, which is impossible for a conventional web server. Ajax enables delivering much more sophisticated and user-friendly applications into the web browser (Swartz, 2005).

Their exists some applications using AJAX they include Google Maps, YouTube, Face book tabs, and Gmail (Dykes & Ullman, 2007).

References

Dykes, L., & Ullman, C. (2007). Beginning Ajax. London: Wiley & sons.

Garrett, J. (2005). Ajax: A New Approach to Web Applications. Retrieved from http://www.adaptivepath.com/ideas/essays/archives/000385.php

Swartz, A. (2005). A Brief History of Ajax. Retrieved from http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/ajaxhistory

America constitutes the concept of welfare to be able to assist the “needy” individuals. However, studies show that these welfare institutions as well as the government’s laws regarding public assistance seem to be inconsistent, worthless, and senseless. It is simply because from then until now, the issue of welfare does not diminish or even decrease due to its continuous modification and reform—and welfare developments have several flaws that need to polish. Research proves that poor people perceive that welfare does not thoroughly help them, but rather put them in shame, more difficulty, and incompetency. It is for the fact that American welfare does not give them what they truly need. It is also believed that America is trying to become responsible towards its people, especially the poor who need help. Nevertheless, this kind of assistance does not meet the standards of the society because it gives limitations, boundaries, and other issues to its recipients. Instead of looking forward to a brighter future using the welfare system, people would not want to utilize what the government has offered. Therefore, no one wants to obtain welfare because of its complexities and discrepancies.

Analysis

In the introductory part of Michael Katz’s “In The Shadow of the Poorhouse,” the author discusses the simple and basic issues of welfare in the United States. The first statement is powerful and attacking because he strongly emphasizes that “nobody likes welfare” (Katz 1996, ix). Even if he does not use any direct information from his sources, the author establishes his credibility in this introduction. The topic sentences are powerful and sustainable enough to understand the author’s arguments and justifications. He emphasizes that welfare is not helpful, and yet it creates problem to the society. From his statements, he tries to prove the fact that American government does not create concrete steps to modify welfare system into a perfect structure where everyone can receive better assistance and not limited to the few individuals.

It seems that the main points and ideologies of the author are located in the introduction, but of course, the readers are trying to search for more information—the deepening of arguments’ context and since it is only an introduction, the readers have no reason to search for more information about the author’s claims. It is for the fact that in every chapter of the book, the author would surely discuss every statement that he discusses in this part. What is good in this section is that the author uses common and simple vocabularies to let every reader understand his case. He did not use highfaluting words just to prove that he is worthy as a writer. His thoughts are concrete and uncomplicated. He weaved each paragraph with few details that would take the readers into the next chapter and further. However, readers could not easily justify if the text is great or agreeable if the basis is the introductory part alone. Though it is the summary of the text, it is believed that introduction does not hold the whole book because it is only the beginning—not the middle and end.

Reference

Katz, M. (1996). A Social History of Welfare in America, 10^th Ed. Basic Books.

This paper aims to understand and provide an abstract on the chapter “State formation and Social Policy” and subsequently provide my own opinion on the subject. Throughout the article, the author has relied on a historical perspective to relate the United States’ Social policy throughout the years.

The article starts out by identifying the beginnings of the modern ‘welfare states’ till the 1920s. European and Australasian states during this time were introducing new social reform and introducing comprehensive systems of support of incomes and social insurance that covered the whole populations of countries. The article then relates the fact that subsequent to World War 2, Britain also introduced a lot of changes to social policy that were primarily a derivation of the policies adopted by the welfare states.  Te author argues that comparing these states’ policies to America and subsequently adjudging it to be a welfare state laggard overlooks some very poignant points. Chief among them remains that many social policies were introduced in the US during this time that could have been only applicable to America due to its dissimilarity with other nations.

Continuing with the same topic, even though the United States did not implement the policy regarding pensions for all industrial workers, it did however during the same time implement policies that enhanced the stature of female dominated public agencies that passed regulations that would benefit women and their children. After the Great Deal, in the 1930s, three vital federal provisions were included in the legislation. These included unemployment insurance, public assistance and old age insurance.

The article further suggests and builds on the fact that even though social policy is considered to be free of any political prejudices, it however does fall victim at times to political struggles and debates. The article introduces two distinct schools of thought regarding corporations in America and the role have played throughout the twentieth century as a result of their pre-eminence in politics. One considers that all the welfare policies are weighed d by the corporations with regards to if they would fit in well within their existing systems. The second is that any welfare policy is simply struck down by these corporations, owing to the cost it would entail.

The article also considers the formation of the state and the importance of social policies within it. The article points out that the United States’ policies had created corporate giants that were functioning nationally but they did not have any checks and balances with regards to the provision of social support structures. The article further goes on to state the patterns that led to the U.S state formation and how they affected social policy. The author further points out that the civil rights revolution and other similar events in the history of the United States had a tremendous effect on the way social policies in the country were shaped.

The author concludes the discussion by pointing out that the people of the United States are as undecided and hesitant regarding social welfare policies as they were 200 years ago. This just underscores the fact that social policy has remained hostage to the different divisions within American Society and social, ethnic diversity contained within.

The preceding paragraph outlines my judgment of the article as well. My understanding of the situation is that if the American people want to have a viable and all-encompassing federal social welfare policies then this web of insecurities and differences ought to be broken. The mistakes made in the past have to be learnt from and the success of the welfare state systems in other parts of the world serve testimony to the fact that it could only be beneficial  for the country.

References

Skocpol, Theda. (1995) “Social policy in the United States”. Publisher: Princeton University Press.

Introduction

Social Theory and Social Structure is a landmark work by Robert King Merton first published in 1949. It is one of the most frequently cited works in the social sciences as it is a collection of theories and insights within structural – functional paradigm. Merton studied under Talcott Parsons at Harvard and later became professor at Columbia. The book put the task of sociological analysis at a higher level by introducing several concepts in the discipline such as manifest and latent functions/dysfunctions, middle range theories, self-fulfilling prophecy, and reference groups among several others. In this work consisting of almost 700 pages, the author develops a theory of deviant behavior linked to various types of social adaptations. Merton rejects the idea of grand theories for the discipline of sociology and introduces the notion of middle range theories falling between grand theories on one hand and narrow, empirical observation on the other. Like Durkheim, he focuses on objective facts and attempts to delineate objective consequences that are observable from subjective dispositions. He distinguishes latent functions from manifest functions based on functional analysis. While both manifest and latent functions have objective consequences for the social system, the former are intended or recognized, the latter are not. Evidently, of all theorists of social structure, Merton perhaps made the greatest impact on empirical research. That Merton is a “Durkhemian” writing in the functionalist tradition is nowhere more evident than this work. Merton’s major contribution lies in clarification and codification of functional analysis.

Summary

The book Social Theory and Social Structure is divided into four parts. Part I deals with Theoretical Sociology, its history and systematics. Part II is devoted to studies in social and cultural structure, Part III focuses on Sociology of Knowledge and Mass Communication, while part IV looks into Studies in the sociology of science. The  chapters in Part I (Sociological Theory) include (I).Manifest and Latent Functions (p.19) (II) The Bearing of Sociological Theory on Empirical Research (p.85) and (III) The Bearing of Empirical Research on Sociological Theory (p.102). The chapters included under part II (Studies in Social and Cultural Structure) are (IV) Social Structure and Anomie (p.131), (V) Continuities in the Theory of Social Structure and Anomie (p.181), (VI) Bureaucratic Structure and Personality (p.195), (VII) Role of the Intellectual in Public Bureaucracy (p.207), (VIII) Contributions to the Theory of Reference Group Behavior (WITH ALICE S ROSSI) (p.225), (IX) Continuities in the Theory of Reference Groups and Social Structure (p.281), (X) Patterns of Influences: Local and Cosmopolitan Influentials (p.387) and (XI) The Self-fulfilling Prophecy (p.421). Part III of the book under the heading “The Sociology of Knowledge and Mass Communications contains” contains the chapters – (XII) The Sociology of Knowledge (p.456), (XIII) Karl Mannheim and the Sociology of Knowledge (p.489)  and (XIV) Studies in Radio and Film Propaganda (with Paul F. Lazarsfeld) (p.509). Part IV of the book is placed under the heading “Studies in the Sociology of Science” and the chapters included in it are (XV) Science and the Social Order (p.537), (XVI) Science and  Democratic Social Structure (p.550), (XVII) The Machine, the Worker, and the Engineer (p.562), (XVIII) Puritanism, Pietism, and Science (P.574) and (XIX) Science and Economy of 17th Century England (p.607).

In the first part, Merton makes at least two important useful contributions in the field of sociology – the theories of the middle range and the manifest and latent functions. He identifies two unacceptable trends within sociology that are narrow or radical empiricism focused just to collection of data without theorizing and abstract theorizing and consequently recommends sociological theories of the middle range as a solution. The introduction of Manifest and Latent functions in chapter III is designed to improve functional analysis. He introduces the notion of multiple consequences and manifest & latent functions to address some of the problems encountered in sociological enquiry. Merton further discusses the relationship between theory and empirical research and their intimate links at length. Merton cautions against confusing sociological theory with five scientific activities including methodology, general sociological orientations, concepts, interpretations and statements of uniformities and recommends that these activities need to be distinguished from one another. Merton analyzes sociological theory the function of which is to unify disparate empirical findings. In the discussion of social goals and anomie in chapter 6, Merton identifies causes of dysfunctions one among which is the conflict between cultural goals and institutional norms.

Some of the other landmark contributions that Merton makes in this work include contributions to the theory of reference group behavior and the concept of relative deprivation and self fulfilling prophecy. The concept of relative deprivation is related to the concept of reference group behavior in that the concept of relative deprivation is helpful in clarifying what according to Merton is counter intuitive, yet in the absence of a theory, according to Merton, concept alone cannot explain a phenomenon. The theory of reference group therefore has greater explanatory value in understanding the notion of relative deprivation. Merton discusses self fulfilling prophecy under chapter XIII which according to Merton is similar to W.I Thomas’ notion of “situation”. In other words, it is a false definition of the situation attracting a response that makes the originally false conception real in outcome.

The Sociology of Knowledge and Mass Communication (Part III) according to Merton is increasingly gaining prominence in America because the U.S society has come to share certain characteristics with the European societies where the discipline originally developed with the consequence that sociology of knowledge has moved from periphery to the center of attention. In Part IV of the book, Merton examines what he calls the norms of science, a set of basic values that govern scientific communities. These values according to Merton are universalism, communism, disinterestedness and organized skepticism.

Analysis of the Content: Part I (pp. 19-120)

Beginning with the sociological theory and its implications for the discipline of sociology, Merton rejects the two extreme approaches in evidence in sociological enquiry. Thus, according to him both narrow empiricism and abstract theorizing (as in Parsons) must be replaced by middle range theories in sociological enquiry. Merton explains the reasons for proposing middle range theories. According to Merton, we need to develop “special theories applicable to limited conceptual ranges”. Some of the examples of these limited conceptual range theories are social control, reference groups, deviant behavior, the unanticipated consequences of social behavior, and social perception because they can be empirically validated which is an advantage to a sociologist unlikely to be had with “total conceptual structure”. Merton refers to these limited range theories as the middle range theories.

A major concern that seems to engage Merton in Part I is the review of chief modes of analysis in functional reasoning. So, Merton goes on to identify the major problems in functionalism theory and addressing the same. Merton is not satisfied that functionalism invariably sees contributions of practices to cultural system. The second issue with functionalism that he raises is the tendency to confuse subjective category of motive with the objective category of function. He addresses these two issues in functional analysis with the introduction of analytical concepts of multiple consequences and the manifest and latent functions.  Merton argues against certain functional assumptions that he identifies as three postulates, that is, the postulate of functional unity of society, the postulate of universal functionalism and the postulate of indispensability (p.87). The introduction of manifest and latent functions that Merton introduces makes a distinct improvement in functional analysis. The distinction between manifest and latent function, according to Merton is effective against confusion between conscious motivations for social behavior and its objective consequences. While manifest functions are intentional and recognized, the latent functions are neither intended nor recognized. The unintended consequences can be functional, dysfunctional or non-functional. According to Merton, sociological theory must be distinguished from methodology, general sociological orientations, analysis of sociological concepts, post factum sociological interpretations, and statements of uniformities. While methodology refers to the logic of scientific procedure, a set of related propositions characterize a theory. Concepts alone do not constitute a theory but they must be interrelated in the form of a scheme. In other words, concepts are variables between which empirical relationships can be identified. Merton highlights active role of empirical research as against passive role of verifying and testing theory.

Analysis Part II (pp.121-438)

In this part Merton defends functionalism against one of its major criticisms that functionalism fails to explain social change. According to Merton, although functional analysis largely focuses on systemic order and maintenance, the issue of systemic change can still be found stemming from internal as well as external sources. Internal change or change within system results from malfunctioning of the social system from within. Merton chooses to elucidate it with the case of conflict between cultural goals and institutional norms leading to anomie. The system is said to be in order or equilibrium when the two (goals and institutional norms) are in agreement, while anomie or disequilibrium results when the two are in conflict. Anomie resulting from conflict within social and cultural structure is understood to be the structural basis for deviant behavior. Merton argues that anomie can be a catalyst for societal change. The five modes of adaptations identified by Merton in context of cultural goals and institutional norms are Conformity, Innovation, Ritualism, Retreatism and Rebellion. While conformity is acceptance of both cultural goals and institutionalized means to achieve them, rebellion, in contrast is the rejection of both.

The reciprocal relationship between concepts and theories in general is best illustrated by Merton in the relationship between a concept of relative deprivation and a theory of reference group behavior. According to Merton, individuals can make three kinds of comparison taking others as a point of reference. These include comparison with others who were in actual association, with those in the same status or category and with those in different social statuses or category, or a combination of the three.

While differentiating concepts from theory, Merton makes it clear that theories need to have wider applicability. A theory, according to Merton, should be generalized enough to take into account both membership and non-membership group orientations. The aim of reference group theory for instance is to systematize the determinants and consequences of a set of social behaviors linked to evaluation and self-appraisal in context of values and standards of other individuals and groups. These other individuals and groups serve as the frames of reference and of comparison.

In other words, while concepts are a part of a theory, the connection between concept and theory must be established so that the concept assists in theoretical clarification and formulation of problem for further inquiry. Yet another important concept that Merton discusses is “self-fulfilling prophecy”. According to him, it is actually how we define a situation that is integral to the situation itself which in turn, in fact, determines the outcome in a way it is defined and is hence peculiar to social life.

Analysis: Part III (PP.439-530)

Sociology of knowledge, according to Merton deals with relationship between knowledge on one hand and existential factors in society or culture such as class, role, values and ethos on the other hand. Knowledge is understood to include idea or mode of thought of every type dealing with the universal range of cultural products. Merton distinguishes the views of classical theorists on sociology of knowledge from those of his own. Thus, ideas have a material basis for Marx; Max Scheler distinguishes between cultural sociology and the sociology of real factors; Mannheim explores varieties of perspectives and knowledge corresponding to a variety of group formations; Durkheim derives categories of thoughts from social structure; and according to the idealist and emanationist theory of Sorokin, source of knowledge is cultural mentalities. The relationship between knowledge and existential factors as defined by these classical theorists are identified either in terms of causal or functional models or in symbolic or meaningful paradigms. However, Merton finds Znaniecki’s concept of “the social circle” useful in analysis of sociology of knowledge.

Merton’s sociology of knowledge is based on five key issues – (i) the existential basis of mental productions, (ii) the varieties and aspects of mental production, subject to sociological analysis, (iii) the specific relationships between mental productions and existential basis, (iv) the functions of existentially conditioned mental productions and existential basis (v) the functions of existentially conditioned mental productions and the conditioned under which the imputed relations obtain. Merton credits Mannheim with offering broad contours of the sociology of knowledge, yet he finds his theory very loose and burdened with dubious philosophical claims, unclear in identifying the range of mental productions with regard to the exact sciences. The theory according to Merton is imprecise and inconsistent in specifying the exact character of the relationship.

Merton identifies parallels between the study of mass communications in America and that of sociology of knowledge in Europe, yet there are important differences that Merton identifies. Mass communication in America has come to be called “popular culture” concerned as it is with public opinion and mass beliefs, while the same in the European version is based on complex systems of knowledge and eventually they get reshaped and distorted as they subsequently filter down into the popular culture.

Analysis: Part IV (pp.531-628)

Merton has made significant contributions to the field of sociology of science. With his analysis, Merton has established a case for sociology of science that examines the linkage between science and social structure. He points out at the neglect of science in sociology. While many sociology text books recognize the social institutions of family, economy, and religion, rarely is science mentioned as a social institution. The sociology of science must be based on empirical observation rather than being a conceptual discipline.

Merton’s thesis in “Puritanism, Pietism and Science” is that the “Puritan Ethic” or ascetic Protestantism was one of the causes that fostered the growth of science in 17th century England. Merton delineates the ethos of science or a set of prescriptive norms that characterize the field of science and scientists. The four prescriptive norms are communism, universalism, disinterestedness, and organized skepticism. These are the four institutional imperatives of science having their source in institutional goal and the technical methods. Communism refers to the social collaboration employed in science so that scientific findings and products are assigned to the community. Universalism refers to the pre-established impersonal criteria to which claims of truth are subjected. Disinterestedness in science and scientific community ensures a structure of control to ensure integrity and resist fraud and cheating despite competitiveness within the community. Organized skepticism comes through socialization within the community that makes scientists critical. These institutional values and norms transmitted through the means of precepts, examples and sanctions are at the core of the scientific community.

However, the scientific community is not free from disputes and deviance. There are disputes over priority despite emphasis on originality and humility. There are systems of rewards allocation in science just, as in other social institutions, for successful performance of roles, for instance, Nobel Prize and naming a discovery after the scientist. However deviance results when aspirations remain unfulfilled. In other words, scientists’ ascription to the value of originality dedicates them to the advancement of knowledge, yet their deep involvement in dispassionate scientific enquiry and successful outcome makes them emotionally vulnerable to failure resulting in deviance within scientific community.

Evaluation of the content

The book in four parts is unarguably a major contribution to the discipline of Sociology. The book has revived the functionalist tradition in Sociology which was in the danger of losing its academic vitality for Merton successfully addresses the challenges against functionalism. While functionalism itself replaced the evolutionary tradition in anthropology as mainstream anthropological approach, its major weaknesses including changelessness, focus on either narrow empiricism without theoretical foundation or on abstract theorizing needed to be addressed. Merton’s introduction of the middle range theories makes a huge sense as the findings can be tested and generalized with the help of empirical data. The bearing of sociological theory on empirical research and the bearing of empirical research on sociological theory bears testimony to Merton’s emphasis on introduction of rigorous standards in the discipline of sociology. On the basis of the discussion in part I, Merton makes claims in favor of sociological theory – logically connected propositions based on empirical data – from which empirical uniformities can be derived. The structural functional approach in sociology, therefore, is a great improvement over functionalism with his primary thrust on use of functional analysis as a research strategy. The concepts of manifest function, latent function, and dysfunction that he introduces are able to accurately describe social stability and change. He links social functions to objective consequences, not subjective dispositions. Merton’s analysis of anomie explains how social structure exerts pressure on some individuals to act in non-conforming ways. Therefore, Merton departs markedly from macro level approach in sociology as evident in the works of Parsons and others. He introduced the notion of middle range theories as appropriate to the discipline of sociology focused to the restricted set of phenomena. The modest explanations could be easily verified through empirical research before they could possibly be systematized into theoretical systems of broader scope and generalization. In his analysis of deviant behavior, he refines Durkheim’s conception of anomie, and like Durkheim, Merton too finds deviance as a consequence of structural disorganization. Social structure is, therefore, at the center of deviant behavior when the universally imposed success goals on the members of a society actually restrict their access to the institutionalized means to achieve them. Under his schema, only a conformist with internalized success goals and institutionalized means to achieve success has access to the legitimate means to achieve their goal.

Merton undertakes rather ambitious projects in the next two parts. The fundamental question that Merton raises is how sociology of knowledge with deep roots in Europe and especially German society and culture could establish in North America. The answer he finds is not in the immigration of German sociologists to the U.S but in the receptivity of the American thought to the problems, concepts and theories dealt by sociology of knowledge. These issues are pertinent to the contemporary American social situation as, the American society has come to share some of the characteristics of the European societies where this discipline first developed. However, it may be pointed out here that Merton fails to make a detailed analysis of the social crisis in America. In fact one might argue that socio-political and economic environment in North America during the post war period has been of economic growth without major social upheavals.

While Merton’s work has influenced approaches to the history of science, his thesis raises a number of difficulties for a comparative sociology of science. Merton has for instance neglected the contribution of Catholicism to scientific change and the role of counter-reformation in the development of western rationalism. However, the work of Talcott Parsons in his comparative studies of historical formation of societal communities is an exception. Merton’s thesis also turns into difficulties in case of Islamic sciences as Turner (1992) points out. Yet it is difficult to ignore Merton’s enormous contribution in the fields of sociology and social anthropology as evident in this work. This is an ambitious work that sets out to define the enterprise of sociology and the methodological approach that social anthropologists should undertake. Merton continues to influence sociology of science by delineating its subject matter and methodology.

Conclusion: This is a major book by Robert Merton that offers us almost complete contributions made by him in the discipline. The four parts of the books clarify the four areas the author has focused on. Since the book has introduced several sociological concepts and identified the theoretical and empirical approach relevant to the discipline, it continues to be the focus of attention of researchers and academicians and is therefore the most cited work in the discipline of sociology and social anthropology. Merton tells us what should be the approach of the discipline of sociology and what the practitioners of sociology and social anthropology should aim at, for instance, Merton is clear that the intellectual requirement of the history of sociological thought should go beyond compilation of sociological doctrine. He proposes the theory of middle range aimed at addressing theoretical challenges faced by the discipline. His work on deviance addresses the challenges against functionalism. A functioning social system need not be static rather the systemic changes can be brought about by deviant behavior. The other conceptual tools like the unanticipated consequences of purposive action, social perception, reference groups, social control etc had been neglected before Merton’s work. Merton could see the inherent weaknesses in the notion of contributions invariably made by part to the whole in a social system as well as confusion between motive, a subjective category and function, an objective category. Merton, therefore, rightly points out that there can be multiple consequences as well as aggregate consequences. Similarly notions of manifest and latent functions address these confusions.

In the introduction to The sociology of science, Storer, Norman W (1993) claims: “If Robert K Merton has not yet been publicly described as a founding father of the sociology of science, there is at least substantial agreement among those who know the field that its present strength and vitality are largely the result of his labors over the past forty years. His work has given the discipline its major paradigm. This judgment is perhaps most decisively affirmed when set forth not by many whose work is guided by that paradigm but by those who find faults with some aspects of it” (p.XI)

Merton offers methodological contributions for the sociology of science. Institutions of science, according to Merton should be empirically and objectively studied through journals and biographies.

References

Merton, Robert K (1968) Social Theory and Social Structure, The Free Press: New York

Merton, Robert K & Storer, Norman W (1993) The sociology of science theoretical and empirical investigations, Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Turner, Bryan S (1992) Regulating bodies; essays in medical sociology, Routledge

The two sonnets discussed here are Sonnet 18, commonly known by its opening line “Shall I compare thee to a summer day” and Sonnet 130 (My mistresses’ eyes), by William Shakespeare. The first one belongs to the “Young Man” cycle, generally agreed to be addressed to “The Youth” or “Young Man” while the latter belongs to the “Dark Lady” cycle.

At first glance, both sonnets tackle the theme of beauty. The opening lines of Sonnet 18 invoke the ultimate perfection of the summer day, “the most beautiful thing in an (English) world” (Vendler 121) as the basis of comparison. The beauty of the poet’s intended object of affection is far greater than that of the summer’s day, and therefore the following lines illustrate the degradation of such a perfect simile when compared to a mortal’s beauty. A summer’s day may be windy, hot and the summer is just a season lasting for three months – the beauty of the mortal is “more lovely and more temperate” meaning it is more constant, without excessive extremes of passion or lust. The perceived standards of beauty are too frail and imperfect to capture successfully the beauty that the poet sees. Sonnet 130 addresses the theme of beauty in a similar fashion. All the standards of beauty simply cannot apply to the mistress in question for her beauty is of different order. There is an invocation of a perceived standard of beauty, almost a checklist against which the poet compares the dark beauty of his mistress. While generally agreed that this sonnet is a parody of the sonnets that were in vogue at a time, it nevertheless asserts the notion that beauty is differently perceived in different times and by different persons. While the standardized notions become vacuous and almost serialized in an endless procession of “perfection” one can easily become desensitized to the real beauty.

As intricate an observer as Shakespeare was, he would often touch upon many different themes in his works. Closely intertwined with the theme of beauty is the theme of nature and quality of art in the Sonnet 18. Achieving immortality through a work of art that would capture the beauty in its verse puts this sonnet in Procreation sequence, ending with Sonnet 17 (Edmondson).  Although the question of sequence of the sonnets is under much scrutiny, the closing couplet celebrates life through art “as long as men can breathe or eyes can see.”

The visual imagery of the sonnet 18 is sheathed in light, in gold and fair of the summer day, and yet, paradoxically, underneath the surface of a placid summer’s day there is an undertone of things passing away. Summer, as a season, is a metaphor for the intricate beauty of the addressee; at the same time is tinged with the notion of imperfection and brevity. It is “too short” and sometimes “dimm’d”; it will “decline” and fade away. Nature is personified as suffering from imperfections resulting from chance or changing forces that shape it, but, moreover, the personification is reversed as the poet’s darling is exemplified by the nature (“Thy eternal summer shall not fade”) making him, or her, rise above the natural world. Furthermore, there is an extended metaphor of plant life throughout the sonnet, starting with “buds of May” and ending with “When in eternal lines to time thou growest” – it is a sacrament of life and love growing out of the fertile soil of poetry.

A similar imagery exists in Sonnet 130. The sun, the white snow, coral and roses invoke the fairness of a summer day. In this case, it is used to impose a contrast, as the poet’s object of affection possesses attributes that are quite the opposite. By deconstructing the image of his object of affection onto the most common examples of ordinary scrutiny and contrasting them to the ideal (blond, blue-eyed woman who moves gracefully and has a soothing voice), the poet presents us with two images, one of which is clearly a forced construct with no basis in reality.

If we take the image of the summer as a starting point in these two similes, then these two sonnets are equally on the opposite sides of a standardized notion of beauty. Sonnet 18 transcends the beauty as something perfect, above the nature’s course. Sonnet 130 goes the other way round, making beauty seem utterly disconnected to beautiful things. They both, however, arrive at the same destination and that is the profession of a true and consuming love.

Sources:

Arp, Thomas R., Greg Johnson, and Laurence Perrine. Perrine‘s Literature: Structure, Sound, and Sense. Boston, MA: Thomson Wadsworth, 2006. Print.

Edmondson, Paul, and Stanley W. Wells. Shakespeare’s Sonnets. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2004. Print.

Vendler, Helen Hennessy. The Art of Shakespeare’s Sonnets. London: Belknap of Harvard UP, 1997. Print.

Introduction

“What is the driving force in one’s life? Have people been able to achieve what they set out to achieve in the last 10 years or more, and if so, what made them do it? Tony Robbins, a noted psychologist, in a seminar on personality and philosophical development, addressed to an assembly of distinguished guests which included Al Gore, at California, uses the various aspects of rhetoric like pathos, ethos and logos to not only effectively communicate with his audience, but to get them involved in his speech. On raising the question, “Why do we do what we do?” Robbins draws the attention of the audience. While many would believe that Robbins was there to present a motivational seminar, he presents his side of the story to say that he wasn’t there to give a lecture on motivation, but to awaken the emotions in his audience, which he believes, is the cause for the fear of failure. Unless one has the emotion to respond to his/her immediate surroundings, they would not be able to achieve or sustain themselves in this world or achieve their goal. So, the question we’ve got to really ask ourselves is, what is it? What is it that shapes us? One has to have a goal in life, otherwise life would be non-existent. At times comical, and at times playing into the hands of his audience, Robbins asks them astutely as to why and how is it that the quality of life of some people is different from others and what kind of performance was it that made them different from the rest. While Robbins reflects on various theories, it’s the question of emotion or necessity, which he believes is the reason why people do what they do. Ultimately, “it is decisions which shape destiny,” says Robbins, and gives one fulfillment. Seen in many ways to be an autobiographical presentation of the speaker himself, when Robbins speaks of those who “you meet people that have been through ultimate pain — psychologically, sexually, spiritually, emotionally abused — and not always, but often, they become some of the people that contribute the most to society,” it in many ways symbolizes the childhood of the speaker. “In my own life, my life was touched because when I was 11 years old. Thanksgiving: no money, no food. And we’re not going to starve, but my father was totally messed up. My mom was letting him know how bad he messed up. And somebody came to the door and delivered food. My father made three decisions. I know what they were briefly. His focus was: “This is charity. What does it mean? I’m worthless, what’ve I got to do?” Leave my family.” Which he did. The time was one of the most painful experiences of life.” It was then that he took the three decisions that made him achieve what he wanted and fulfill his desires.

Analysis

An intriguing topic that had most of the audience in raptures and a subject which made all sit up and take note of was Tony Robbins’, “Why we do what we do.”  Touching on psychological and philosophical aspects of human nature, Robbins explores the question of ‘why we do what we do.’ In asking the question as to what makes people do what they do, Robbins reflect on the various theories that people generally associate their answers with, like, “people work in their self-interest” or “perhaps it’s the motivation to do things the way they want to do,” and so on. While he agrees that motivation could be one of the forces behind an individual doing a thing, the question on his mind is ‘why?’

A highly interactive and humorous session, Robbins includes his share of rhetoric to make his address more meaningful and appreciative. Quotes like, “I’m here because I believe emotion is the force of life. All of us here have great minds. You know? Most of us here have great minds, right?” draw amusement from the audience.

While asking the audience to ponder over this question ‘why do we do the things we do,’ Robbins says that people generally mistake him to be a motivator which he’s not. What he wants to know is what instigates us to do things we do. He then goes on to say that a way to finding an answer to this question would be to answer what is that motive which instigates your action. There must be some reason other than the so-called, ‘self-interest.’ Ridiculing this theory, Robbins says that when some people say why they do things the way they do, it is the invisible force; the internal drive, or the passion to do it the way the want to do it that makes them do it that way. Unless one has drive, their life would be pointless. If one were to look back in time and see themselves as they were then, and how they are now, it would give an idea of what made them to do what they did. If not for emotion, there would be no life.

For Robbins, there are two master lessons in life; one, the science of achievement, and two; the art of fulfillment. If one were to strive to achieve something, he/she would have to ‘take the invisible and make it visible.’ It is easy for people to dream big, but unless they take the initiative to achieve this, their dreams would remain a dream. It is the emotion to strive for making the invisible visible that makes people successful. Once they do what they want to do and achieve their objective or goal, they master the art of fulfillment. However, this art of fulfillment is rarely mastered.

In coming back to the question of what brings achievement and ultimately fulfillment, Robbins to the question of, “What shapes you?” says, the two invisible forces; One, your state, and two; your model of the world that shapes you long term. It is these two forces which make people make decisions. However, when they want to influence somebody, they’ve got to know what influenced or influences them. In order to do this, one needs to know what “what’s your target? What are you after?” It’s the needs. “There are six human needs” believes Robbins; certainty, uncertainty, significance, and connection and love, which he calls as “the needs of the personalities,” and the last two are the needs of the spirit, namely, “the need to grow, and to contribute beyond ourselves.”

Employing pathos to enliven the audience and instigate their participation, Robbins speech was never short of humor, but at the same time, he was able to communicate the deeper message of his message to them: “And you correct me if I’m wrong. The defining factor is never resources, its resourcefulness. And what I mean specifically, rather than just some phrase, is if you have emotion, human emotion, something that I had experienced from you a day before yesterday at a level that is as profound as I’ve ever experienced, and if you’d communicated with that emotion I believe you would have beat his ass and won.”

The above statement clearly shows that Robbins brings out the importance of emotions. Transformation can happen when “the needs, the beliefs, and emotions” of one are controlled. It is this which will bring fulfillment. Achievement is physical, and fulfillment is spiritual. It is the combination of these two which should make us do what we do. Robbins ends on a high, positive note:

“So there’s more of you to give, and achieve too, we all want to do it. But I mean give, because that’s what’s going to fill you up. And secondly, so you can appreciate — not just understand, that’s intellectual, that’s the mind — but appreciate what’s driving other people. It’s the only way this world is going to change for the better.”

Introduction:

It is a widely held belief that man is an animal that has the potential to do all sorts of things. Man can go to the extreme of civilized and learned individual – an angelic being. However, man can also go to the extreme of being a self conscious, pleasure seeking monster. Indeed, one can learn that there is a monstrous side to every innocent person on the face on the globe. In our time and age, such theories have attracted a lot of attention. Major Oxidental proponents of the monster self of man include Niccolo Machiavelli who promotes the use of fear as a tool of maintaining order with a monster like grip over people (Academon). Further, some points that Frederick Nietzsche put forward in his ‘higher man’ ideology also adhere to this conception. To explain a bit more, Sigmund Freud’s theory of psychoanalysis also focuses around the concept of Id – a storehouse of evil and incarnate desires of man that have no leash whatsoever. Looking ahead, if one looks at the Oriental thinkers and theorists, a person that stresses upon the monster and self interested nature of man is Vishnu Gupta Kotlia Chankia.

Discussion:

Here, a monster personality endorsed by the thinkers mentioned in the previous paragraph will be analyzed. A character that is put forth by the work of Mr. Joseph Conrad through writing of one of the most acclaimed English literature: “The Heart of Darkness”. This novel is unlike the norm in the sense that it is similar to an elongated poem and affects the reader with the depth of ideas and the beauty of with the words are used and inspirations aroused (Topham). Mr. Conrad’s inspiration for the work basically comes from his own experience and time that he spent in the Africas and around Congo in particular. And it focuses around a person he met on that trip.

In the book this character he met is known as ‘Mr. Kurtz’. Initially portrayed as a prosperous and brilliant agent of a company that deals in ivory, Kurtz is depicted as a person that has all the symptoms of a great personality – he has charm, charisma, achievement orientation and hunger to succeed more and more. His skills have caused him to earn the reputation of an ivory trader who alones does better than the combined ranks of ivory stations. However, this has not been without a price. For through this exposure, Kurtz has been inspired more and more by the African laws of the jungle and this starts to morph his social image. This starts to give way to the monster within.

This is because before exposure to the wilds of Africa, Kurtz is depicted as an ordinary man. It is only after the exposure to the system of the jungle that a different personality starts to take over. The monster ego of Kurtz is a product of the trademark silence and unyielding ways of the native African traditions. Kurtz discovers with due course that if he wants to thrive frugally amongst these jungle tribes, he would have to do so with the impression of a powerful being i.e. God so he can change these people towards benefits and development.

However, as the content of Heart of Darkness unfolds, one finds that Kurtz does not realize that his path of leading the natives towards enlightenment would lead to the disintegration of his own civic sense. As his noble vision and Prophetic aspirations to lead and reform these people turn around his head and his own hunger and greed start to take over. For example, as an ivory trader, Kurtz finds he can succeed more if he acquires more ivory by source. Thus, Kurtz displays the monstrous tendency to ‘consume’ all that is possible. He does this by making alliances and enemies of many different tribes so as to maximize his diplomacy and ascendancy of his native teachings. Kurtz raids and razes villages in a blind rage of ambition to acquire more and more.

The obsession and closeness with his ambition can be seen where even the description of Kurtz involves aspects of ivory. For example, his head is given the similitude of an ‘ivory ball’ and his last words are said to come out of his ‘ivory face’. This tells us about the changes in Kurtz that have been the influence of his ambition coupled with environment. As Marlowe puts it, the jungle “got to his veins and consumed his flesh”. The character of Kurtz changes so much in the sight of Marlowe that Marlow identifies two distinct Kurtz – the Kurtz before entering the jungle and the Kurtz after entering the jungle.

Perhaps this is the reason the book stresses thrice that Kurtz’s problem is not just limited to the simple thought of a person going to jungle and having his psyche altered. What oiled and greased this transition of him becoming a monster was the tendency of ‘no restraint’. This makes him change by a large margin and at a very fast rate. Kurtz totally submits to the power and lure of the jungle which he sees is pampering and favoring him in a way that no one ever did. The monster is thus a mix of desires, self obsession, achievement and savagery. In the words of Marlow himself, the powers of darkness claim the character of Kurtz for their own.

Moreover, a thing that appeals most to Marlowe is Kurtz’s voice. This is because the character of Kurtz always presents itself as a voice. Here we find Kurtz giving us yet another example of a monster personality when he stresses that it is not possible to silence his speech or thought process (thus depicting the single mindedness found in monsters).

Further, Kurtz’s depiction as a God amongst the natives has its own consequences. Where the natives know white men are coming for Kurtz, yet, it cannot be said that it was Kurtz who ordered the attack or the natives themselves. So the God that Kurtz is thought of as does have certain limitations. The God is rather a monster that is well taken care of but on the same side also imprisoned by his worshippers. It is ironic that this monster can declare wars on other tribes and order the deaths of people, yet he cannot go away freely if he desires.

So what exactly is the case with Kurtz? How could such a bright and prosperous man fall prey to such lowly desires and at such a fast rate? Has Kurtz become less intelligent and submitted to his animal instincts? No! The intelligence is there but it is now being used by a different mind and soul. The intelligence is being used by the mind of a monster that has woken up in Kurtz.

This monstrosity also has the best of Kurtz as we see that the mental problem actually turns into a physical problem and Kurtz becomes sick and biologically diseased terminally. Further, the narrations also explain of how Kurtz has an empty soul. This shows how the wilderness has the capacity to extract the humanity out of a man and make him a monster. Even Kurtz final words are a result of horror about mankind.

Thus, one may ask that if Kurtz is look at as a person that is suffering and diseased why is it that this monster is still looked after as a demigod or God. The answer is simple. Kurtz as a monster is also a person that possesses the potential for more greatness, thus it is the achievement orientation and persistence of this monster, rather than the savagery and darkness of Kurtz’s monstrous inclinations that must be noted.

Conclusion:

Thus, Kurtz, is a perfect symbiosis of the ‘evil genius’ archetype of man. This evil genius is a monster that makes up for a dramatic degeneration of the nature of man. This degenerated character resembles the personas of Heathcliff from ‘Wuthering Heigthts’ and Ahab from ‘Moby Dick’ (Spark Notes).

Also, the character of Kurtz is referred to as hollow by Marlowe on more than one occasion. Even though this hollowness is to be considered a choice amongst two unfavorable options, it should not be considered harmless. Kurtz, like some mischievous people also seeks ways to consolidate his wrong ideas and actions performed under his banner. For example, One can see how Kurtz gives Marlowe a collection of mind boggling questions that prove that Marlowe’s men and Marlowe himself are not very much different then Kurtz

Moreover, Kurtz is a person that has no fixed personality or core competencies. If one analyzes, there are a multitude of personalities that Kurtz assumes in the eyes of different people. For example, Kurtz is an awesome musician for his cousin. Next, in the eyes of the journalist he was a leader and diplomat and for his fiancée, Kurtz presents the character of a bright and brilliant humanitarian.

Thus, Kurtz has the gift of appearing different to different individuals. So maybe it’s just in Marlowe’s perception that Kurtz is a monster. However, the point to note is we have learnt that Kurtz has been encouraged and given a choice to choose. And unfortunately, his choice to go for a path that prefers a backward and savage culture with a disregard for others and a craving to get what he wants gives the solid impression of a monster.

Works Cited

Academon. Essay on the Political theory of Niccolo Machiavelli. 2000. 27 January 2011 <http://www.academon.com/Essay-The-Political-Theory-of-Niccolo-Machiavelli/3123>.

Spark Notes. Spark Notes: Heart of Darkness: Analysis of Major characters. 27 january 2011 <http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/heart/canalysis.html>.

Topham, James. ‘Heart of Darkness’ Review. 27 january 2011 <http://classiclit.about.com/od/heartofdarkness/fr/aa_heartdark.htm>.

The essay is mainly about some of the aspects of !Kung society. The positions of women in their culture, how the women are looked upon if they own any kind of primary subsistence. According to Ernestine Friedl, the position of women owning any kind of primary subsistence is higher as compared to others. The essay will also be discussing the gender roles that !Kung men and women share. Whether they both enchant equal rights or the men are ranked and considered higher than !Kung women. The effects of modernization on !Kung society will be discussed. The essay features Kung society and the way men and women spend their lives. Marjorie Shostak wrote a book “Nisa” in which she tried to explicate the cultures and society of !Kung. She interviewed many people, specifically women, and gained an insight on the lives of people living on the edges of Kalahari Desert near Africa.

In the book by Ernestine Friedl, an argument was debated that the position of those women who are involved in some sort of subsistence is higher. The subsistence may include land, animals or any other necessity for life. In !Kung society, the position of women owning some type of life-sustaining property was higher as compared to women who were merely gatherers for their own family or too elderly to gather at all. According to Nisa, in !Kung society the men were the occasional hunters while the women gathered the bulk of vegetable food to their families. !Kung women were responsible for the well being and wellness of their families which included housekeeping, carrying water and firewood, maintaining tools and food preparation and much more (Shostak 11). Women who owned cattle, homes, or lands had more power than those who had nothing. The cattle helped those privileged few women to earn money, goods and services since they could sell milk and/or meat. Women and families who depended on others to provide them with the necessities of life were considered the poorest of all and were given less preference and community standing. The women who provided the primary subsistence to the public had higher position than the others. Nisa, during her marriage to Bo only had goats at one point, and a donkey but never owned a cow. Later on in her life, she lived with a cousin who had three cows which was an important form of economic support.  Nisa was economically at the same level as the normal female gatherers without assets and with average looks but still had a number of men of the society who desired to have a relationship with or marry her. Women provide 60% to 80% of the food for the family but it is those who control more public resources that are the cornerstones of the society. This agrees with Friedl’s observations.

!Kung men and !Kung women share more equality in their status and powers than they like to admit. Contrary to the common depiction of hunter’s gender relation, where the males completely dominate the females, the husband and wife of !Kung society experience nearly equal authority. This was primarily depicted in the case of marriage and relationship practices. Cultures, where men and women are not considered equal, do not usually so openly portray open gender relations. In !Kung society, though marriages were arranged by the parents, women were liberated to protest.  Shostak commented in her book that the independence of !Kung women could be witnessed through the reality that divorce is very common. Very little is invested in the wedding itself or setting up the first hut so that either party can just move on easily if it doesn’t work out (Shostak 118). In these early marriages, it is usually the girl who initiates the divorce. (Shostak 216)
From the facts and data, one can conclude that the !Kung males and females have almost equal roles. This can be verified by Shostak statement in her book that “There is no support in the !Kung data for a view of women in ‘the state of nature’ as oppressed or dominated by men or as subject to sexual exploitation at the hands of males” (Lee).

Nisa, on many occasions left her husbands. If they mistreated her, she could always leave them and find a new one. On the other hand, if the !Kung women did not enjoy equal rights, they would be forced to live with the man they first married. But this was not the case with Nisa, as she had married four times and had innumerable affairs.

Furthermore, within marriages not only men, but women were also free to have extramarital affairs. Additionally, !Kung men and women are liberated  by having polygamy or extramarital relationships.  Despite being married they are not questioned about any of what other cultures might consider illegal actions. Even if the wife or husband comes to know about a transgression, they are unlikely to take action against one another. The gender equality continues with the thought that both men and women can seek sexual pleasure out of their bounds. If these women were being dominated or exploited, they wouldn’t have a choice on what they could do. Shostak quoted in her book that women’s status in the society is nearly equal to that of men, and their influence is considerable. They are often prominent in major family decisions, such as where and when to move and whom their children will marry (Shostak, 11). The women in this culture have a lot of say over their own lives.  However, in the overwhelming majority of societies, women have a lower status than men. !Kung men do have the upper hand and hold the majority of higher positions as spokesmen and healers (Shostak 213)

Like many other cultures around the world, !Kung culture is also affected by the on-going modernization. With modernization happening everywhere this writer anticipates that the women will begin to see that they do not need to depend on the men for hunting, chopping down trees or making the necessary tools for their subsistence. They will not need them as much for protection either as the wild animals disappear.  They are already quite free to live and spend their lives with whomever they want. The !Kung culture is sometimes interpreted as similar to that of Western cultures. The liberty the Western countries benefit from is also experienced by the people of !Kung and with modernization this situation this writer believes that it will only intensify, not regress.

In the !Kung society, there is a striking degree of equality between both the genders. While !Kung men more often hold influential positions like that of the spokespeople or healers, !Kung women participate for the roles of great practical importance, for example in family decisions or economy resolution etc. The !Kung culture downplays many of the approaches that encourage male dominance in other cultures.

Work Cited

Friedl, Ernestine. “Women and Men: An Anthropologist’s View”. New York: Holt, Reinhart, and Winston, 1975.

Lee, R., Human Societies and Ecosystems, (N.A.), Accessed on 27 February 2011.

http://fendersen.com/Lee.htm

Shostak, Marjorie. “Nisa”, Harvard Univ. Pr., Boston. 1981, Accessed on 27 February 2011.

FP is 86 years of age and is a Caucasian female of Lutheran faith and Swedish heritage. She presently lives at Cerenity Senior Care in White Bear Lake, MN. She was born and brought up in Scandia, MN and lived with a big family comprising of her parents, five elder brothers and five sisters on a 60 acre cow farm. Both her parents also spent their lives in Scandia and were of Swedish heritage.

FP was brought up in a lower class family and suffered considerable difficulties in her childhood. However, she was immensely interested in educating herself and was able to complete High School as well as one year of Business College. Her most important role in life was to perform the responsibility of a mother although she always had the desire to become a psychologist. She was unable to pursue her interest in psychology because money was not provided to her on account of being a farmer’s daughter. However, FP did get the opportunity to study astrology and palm reading. This was something that she was able to teach herself although she did not earn a single penny from such specialization. She pursued these studies more out of a sense of achievement and accomplishment. When she was asked if she had ever made attempts to start a business of her own, she replied that “if you were not known in this trade you would not be taken seriously.” She further added that “Plus I was a farmer’s daughter that married a Yugoslavian and nobody took me for anything.”

It is unfortunate that FP is now a widow. She was married in 1945 and lost her husband in 1996. Her husband died after he suffered from severe complications from Malaria. FP is proud of her husband and always speaks very high of him. He fought in World War II and when he returned he was suffering from a number of diseases and other problems. She mentioned that “He spent weeks, months and years at the VA in Minneapolis and that is where he died”.

Her family was against her decision to marry a Yugoslavian but FP was firm and asserted that she fell in love with him primarily because of his good height. She was proud of his 6’2 height and she admired him because he resembled Clark Gable very much. With her husband she had three children; all boys. Actually FP was desperately in need of a female child but had to stop having additional children because they could not afford more children.

FP made efforts to find a suitable job and was eventually able to find a position as a receptionist with 3M after all her children grew up and left home. FP was very happy and would often speak happily that she now felt smarter in comparison to average people but she also regretted that “there wasn’t a lot of opportunities for a farmer’s daughter”.

Presently FP has a very weak economic support system because all her family members have passed away or left her. FP does have three sons but she feels sad in mentioning that “they are delinquent and are in and out of prison”.  FP was questioned as to who takes care of her expenses and finances to which she replied, “who knows, I have no money”. While sitting in FP’s room I saw a very nice 52” Plasma TV and when I asked her about how she was able to purchase such an expensive gadget, she replied, “My delinquent son, he probably stole it.”  However, from what I have known about FP and her sons, I believe that her three sons may have been delinquent for some time but they appear to have improved now. But FP continues to stick to her opinion on the basis of the past instead of reconsidering the improvements that may have occurred in her sons with the passage of time.

On January 23, 2007 FP was admitted to Cerenity Senior Care after she was transferred from Maplewood Center in Maplewood, MN. Her doctors had referred her to Cerenity Senior Care because she was not cared for properly at Maplewood Care Center and she had repeatedly said that it was as good as trash. At the ripe age of 86 years FP had admitted that she was unable to care for herself any more and that she felt good about the help rendered to her by staff at Cerenity Senior Care. FP’s present health status is quite complicated. Her long age has made her legally blind because she no longer has the ability to make out shapes when she tries to see things. Her images of people get blurred when they approach closer to her. She has also admitted that she is unable to see anything with her left eye. To make matters worse, FP is now suffering from type 2 diabetes, because of which she has become entirely dependent on nursing staff to be administered insulin three to four times a day. FP’s old age has caused her to develop further complications by way of hypertension and depression for which she is receiving treatment. It is not known when she contracted this ailment but she is being given treatment with medications. It is evident that FP had been suffering from all these complications much before she was transferred to Cerenity Center and it was only because she was not happy with the treatment and care that she sought a transfer.