The Argument of Elite Theorists Essay Example for Free

The Argument of Elite Theorists Essay In order to assess how useful this view is, we must first look at the differing factions operating within the framework of elite theory. On doing this it will become apparent within the scope of Government, that this view is outdated and riddled with flaws. Elite theory originally developed from the work of Gaetano Mosca and Vilfredo Pareto, two italian sociologists writing at the turn of the last century. Pareto argued that, in the course of history, different leadership qualities are required in order to adapt society to changed circumstances. Essentially, two types of person can be distinguished, lions and foxes, the former, according to Pareto are stolid and forceful, willing to use violence. The latter are basically sly, wheeler-dealer types. One or other type will rule as long as it can cope with the political and economic problems facing it; but in certain circumstances their particular qualities will be insufficient for the task in hand, and they will be deposed by the other group. Pareto describes this process as the circulation of elites, which rise and fall through a combination of psychological aptitudes and historical circumstances, irrespective of the economic or social structure of society. There are many flaws in Paretos work, but the main ones must centre on his inability to explain the origins of the elites rise to power, and his classification of people into two -and only two-psychological types (S.MOORE,1995). The belief that a superior group forms a ruling elite underlies Moscas(1939) writings too, and it is this superiority that he sees leading the elite to power in the first place. Once there, the elite continues to rule, not solely because it is superior but also through its relatively small membership, which makes it far better organised than the mass of the population. Pareto fails to provide a method of measuring and distinguishing betwwen the supposedly superior qualities of elites. He simply assumes that the qualities of the elite are superior to those of the mass. His criterion for distinguishing between lions and foxes is merely his own interpretation of the style of elite rule (HARALAMBOS HOLBORN,1990). Whereas Pareto and Mosca attempted to provide a general theory to explain the  nature and distribution of power in all societies, the American sociologist C.Wright Mills presents a less ambitious and wide-ranging version of elite theory. He limits his analysis to American society in the 1950s. Unlike the early elite theorists, Mills does not believe that elite rule is inevitable: in fact he sees it as a fairly recent development in the U.S.A. Unlike Pareto, who rather cynically accepts the domination of the masses by elites, Mills soundly condemns it. Since he sees elite rule as based upon the exploitation of the masses, he adopts a conflict version of elite theory (HARALAMBOS HOLBORN,1990). Robert A.Dahl has criticised Mills from a pluralist perspective. He has claimed that Mills has simply shown that the power elite has potential for control. Dahl argues, the potential for control is not equivalent to actual control. Dahl maintains that actual control can only be shown to exist by examination of a series of concrete cases where key decisions are made: decisions on taxation and expenditures, subsidies, welfare progrmas, military policy and so on. Dahl claims that by omitting to investigate a range of key decisions, Mills and also like-minded British sociologists have failed to establish where actual control lies. As a result Dahl argues that the case for a power elite remains unproven (HARALAMBOS HOLBORN, 1990). Since the British variant of power elite theory(the idea of a socially and culturally cohesive establishment) was first asserted in the 1950s, it has decreased rather than gained in plausibility. This is first, because British politics has become more polarised, more open and more democratic. It became more polarised in the 1970s, as large differences between major parties displaced consensus. In these circumstances, it became virtually impossible to maintain that elections did not alter things much, and even more difficult after the general election of 1979. Clearly, the advent of Mrs Thatcher changed things a great deal. Second, British government became more open and less secretive. This happened more by inadvertence than design and it was usually resisted by governments of the day. Nonetheless by the 1980s, the public were far more aware of what went on in the inner counsels of the  Cabinet and in the Whitehall village than was the case a generation previously. The publication of politicians diaries and memoirs(Richard Crossman, Barbara Castle), leaks by civil servants(Clive Ponting) and the revelations of goings-on within the secret services by people like Peter Wright provided fascinating if somewhat selective glimpses of power in the inner sanctums of government and made its mysteries less mysterious. Finally, as we have seen, certain important sectors of British society became more democratic. In political parties, members played an increasing role in the election of leaders and the selection of party candidates; in trade unions, balloting on the choice of leaders and on strike decisions became the norm. The increasing hold of television on society tended to promote both greater openess and greater democracy -not least by providing continual public demonstrations that, far from being cohesive and untied, the so-called establishment spoke with many, often sharply divergent, voices (COXALL ROBINS,1989). The overall count against the notion of an establishment in Britain is clear; it is neither united, nor -in an age of revelations and media coverage- mysterious, nor-and most important of all -free from popular control. It is a myth.

The effects of homelessness: Literature and research

The effects of homelessness: Literature and research Mini Paper #1:Intervention Research with the Homeless Introduction The effects of homelessness as a social condition are both wide reaching, and difficult to grasp in its scope. It is a circumstance of varying severity, which people may move through for different lengths of time and for different reasons, making it challenging to establish an accurate breadth of its range (Biswas-Diener Diener, 2006; Parsell, 2011). Link and colleagues (1994) have estimated that 14% of the United States may experience homelessness at some point in their life. According to The US Department of Housing and Urban Development (2011) there may be as many as 400,000 homeless individuals in the United States on a given day, and that 1,500,000 people may experience homelessness within the span of a year (HUD, 2011). A person’s familiarity with the homeless condition will vary depending on whether they experience it chronically, temporarily, or periodically (Rivlin, 1990). People may experience homelessness as a result of unemployment, natural or human-constructed ad versity, mental illness, or a combination of factors (Hagen, 1987). The influences that contribute to the condition of homelessness may also play a hand in the progression and outcome of the person experiencing it, be it mental health or substance abuse issues, personal crisis, or systemic pitfalls (Chamberlain Johnson, 2013). As a result of the potential reasons someone may enter homelessness, the rates and demographics of the homeless population vary among regions of the United States (HRI, 2012), and fluctuate in time. From the period of 2009 to 2012, homelessness as a whole decreased by 1% despite the conditions of the economic downturn, while the number of people who would have been homeless but instead doubled up with friends or family increased by 13% during this same time period (HRI, 2012). Predictors – risk problem While any number of circumstances may contribute to the condition of homelessness, The Homeless Research Institute (2012) has identified four population groups who are at an increased risk of entering homelessness; people living with family and friends for economic reasons, prisoners who have been recently released, people aging out of foster care, and the medically uninsured. At its core, whether or not someone will enter or exit the condition of homelessness is influenced by a person’s income, their access to supports and social service resources, and the cost of available housing. As a result, other socioeconomic conditions associated with marginalization can increase a person’s risk of entering homelessness, such as unemployment or mental illness, and the condition of homelessness itself may even serve to fortify these things (Goodman, Saxe, Harvey, 1991; Thoits, 1982). Knowledge base/theoretical explanations No clear theory explains the phenomenon of chronic homelessness better or more appropriately than another, although the perspective adopted will affect the explanations and constructs that are accounted and controlled for within research. For example, the social estrangement model posits that upon entering homelessness people experience a general sense of alienation and proceed to adapt to a lifestyle that reinforces this estrangement (Grigsby, Baumann, Gregorich Roberts-Gray, 1990). The concept of estrangement has been adapted into a measured scale, and this model has been used in research to examine the reintroduction of employment into the lives of the homeless as a potential intervention to decrease one’s sense of estrangement and reintegrate back into society (Ferguson et al., 2012). Social constructionism has been used to explain homelessness as an artificial construct that is used to describe an extreme form of poverty that actually exists on a spectrum, and is not the binary distinction that is used to give a blanket idea to what actually amounts to a diverse range of experiences within the homeless population (Tosi, 2010). This idea has led to research and programs that operate with a continuum definition of homelessness (Anderson, Tulloch, 2000). Social alienation theory has also been tested in the form of measuring the change of social support network of homeless adults across time spent homeless (Eyrich, Pollio North, 2003). Key research questions/intervention proposals Because of the variety of factors that may exacerbate or contribute to homelessness, there are consequently any number of potential interventions and areas of concern to address. Researchers have found it useful to distinguish among cultural or demographic subgroups within the homeless population to address the concerns that appear to be more pertinent to a given subgroup (Aubry et al., 2012). Such distinctions may seek to reduce destructive behaviors or victimization associated with the homeless lifestyle itself (Justus, Burling Weingardt, 2006). From a broader perspective, investigators may attempt to identify how the homeless will best establish and maintain long-term housing (Groton, 2013), as well as how to maximize retention and participation of services for the homeless in general (Padgett et al., 2008). Intervention research that concerns itself with the homeless population must make educated assumptions about the most salient issues worth addressing, the causes of those issues that may be controlled, and the types of outcomes that should be attained. Meaningful intervention research should attempt to identify questions that address the preventative conditions of homelessness, the exacerbating conditions that may prolong someone’s experience with it, and the opportunities available to exit it. Social networks play an important role in people’s lives, and the homeless are no exception. Some forms of social support may serve to normalize the homeless experience (Auerswald and Eyre, 2002), while others may offer support for exiting homelessness (Zlotnick, Tam, Robertson, 2003). An appropriate research question in this area would ask; what are the characteristics of social networks that serve to contribute to a person’s successful attempts to exit homelessness? An intervention program that would attempt to capitalize on known social support networks that reinforce a person’s decision to exit homelessness could be as simple as incorporating a series of questions into existing outreach programs that are designed to identify such relationships. Once these relationships are identified, practitioners could be instructed to attempt outreach with these social network members to include them in their work with their clients. One of the issues associated with homeless encampments is their proximity to necessary services (Chamard, 2010), of these healthcare access may be included. To build off of research which has identified that demographics as well as distinct lifestyles among the homeless may mean the difference between healthcare access or not (Nakonezny Ojeda, 2005), a further relevant research question may ask how can people living in homeless encampments attain more consistent and accessible healthcare? Intervention work in this vein could seek to implement medical outreach programs in areas known to have higher concentrations of homeless encampments, identify how medical conditions are impacted as a result, and further modify outreach techniques depending on the results. Homeless youth have been shown to have increased rates of victimization relative to their housed counterparts (Tyler, Gervais Davidson, 2013; Tyler Melander, 2012), and that victimization is associated with higher rates of substance use (Bender et al., 2012). Potential interventions in this area could include fusing a program designed to address substance use among homeless youth with training staff to have heightened awareness of who may be at risk for increased victimization, and address individual cases as needed. The potential for intervention research within the homeless population is plentiful. References Anderson, I., Tulloch, D. (2000). Pathways through homelessness: A review of the research evidence. Edinburgh: Scottish Homes. Aubry, T., Klodawsky, F., Coulombe, D. (2012). Comparing the housing trajectories of different classes within a diverse homeless population. American Journal Of Community Psychology, 49(1-2), 142-155. Auerswald, C. L., Eyre, S. L. (2002). Youth homelessness in San Francisco: A life cycle approach. Social Science Medicine, 54(10), 1497-1512. Bender, K., Thompson, S. J., Ferguson, K., Komlo, C., Taylor, C., Yoder, J. (2012). Substance use and victimization: Street-involved youths perspectives and service implications. Children And Youth Services Review, 34(12), 2392-2399. Biswas-Diener, R., Diener, E. D. (2006). The Subjective Well-Being of the Homeless, and Lessons for Happiness. Social Indicators Research, 76(2), 185-205. Chamard, S., United States, Center for Problem-Oriented Policing. (2010). Homeless encampments. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Chamberlain, C., Johnson, G. (2013). Pathways into adult homelessness. Journal Of Sociology, 49(1), 60-77. Eyrich, K. M., Pollio, D. E., North, C. S. (2003). An exploration of alienation and replacement theories of social support in homelessness. Social Work Research, 27(4), 222-231. Ferguson, K. M., Bender, K., Thompson, S. J., Maccio, E. M., Pollio, D. (2012). Employment status and income generation among homeless young adults: Results from a five-city, mixed-methods study. Youth Society, 44(3), 385-407. Goodman, L. A., Saxe, L., Harvey, M. (1991). Homelessness as psychological trauma: Broadening perspectives. American Psychologist, 46(11), 1219-1225. Grigsby, C., Baumann, D., Gregorich, S. E., Roberts-Gray, C. (1990). Disaffiliation to Entrenchment: A model for understanding homelessness. Journal of Social Issues, 46(4), 141-156. Groton, D. (2013). Are housing first programs effective? A research note. Journal of Sociology And Social Welfare, 40(1), 51-63. Hagen, J. L. (1987). The heterogeneity of homelessness. Social Casework, 68(8), 451-457. The Homelessness Research Institute (HRI). (January, 2012). The State of Homelessness in America, 2012. National Alliance to End Homelessness. Retrieved from: http://lhc.la.gov/downloads/esg/TheState_of_Homelessness_in_America2012.pdf Justus, A. N., Burling, T. A., Weingardt, K. R. (2006). Client Predictors of Treatment Retention and Completion in a Program for Homeless Veterans. Substance Use Misuse, 41(5), 751-762. Link, B.G., Susser, E., Stueve, A., Phelan, J., Moore, R.E., Struening, E. (1994). Lifetime and five-year prevalence of homelessness in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 84(12), 1907–1912. Nakonezny, P.A., Ojeda, M. (2005). Health Services Utilization Between Older and Younger Homeless Adults. The Gerontologist, 45(2), 249-254. Padgett, D. K., Henwood, B., Abrams, C., Davis, A. (2008). Engagement and retention in services among formerly homeless adults with co-occurring mental illness and substance abuse: Voices from the margins. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 31(3), 226-233. Parsell, C. (2011). Homeless identities: Enacted and ascribed. British Journal Of Sociology, 62(3), 442-461. Rivlin, L. G. (1990). The significance of home and homelessness. Marriage Family Review, 15(1-2), 39-56. Thoits, P. A. (1982). Life stress, social support, and psychological vulnerability: Epidemiological considerations. Journal of Community Psychology, 10(4), 341-362. Tosi, A. (2010). Coping with Diversity. Reflections on Homelessness in Research in Europe. OSullivan, Eoin/Busch-Geertsema, Volker/Quilgars, Deborah/Pleace, Nicholas (Hg.): Homelessness Research in Europe. Brà ¼ssel, 221-236. Tyler, K. A., Gervais, S. J., Davidson, M. (2013). The relationship between victimization and substance use among homeless and runaway female adolescents. Journal Of Interpersonal Violence, 28(3), 474-493. Tyler, K. A., Melander, L. A. (2012). Poor parenting and antisocial behavior among homeless young adults: Links to dating violence perpetration and victimization. Journal Of Interpersonal Violence, 27(7), 1357-1373. US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). (2011). The 2010 Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress. Washington, DC. (2010 AHAR). Zlotnick, C., Tam, T., Robertson, M. J. (2003). Disaffiliation, substance use, and exiting homelessness. Substance Use Misuse, 38(3-6), 577-599. 1

Criticisms Of Symbolic Interactionism Sociology Essay

Criticisms Of Symbolic Interactionism Sociology Essay This chapter will outline the research methods which are used to explain procedures for collecting data. In addition, it discusses literature which underlies the methods and reasons for the chosen data collection procedures. The chapter presents an outline of research methodology (qualitative approach) and the tools for data collection which are commonly used with each particular method. The chapter focuses on the research setting, instruments for data collection, data analysis, issues of validity and reliability, and ethical issues. This chapter will clearly define the research methods used to perform the study. The researcher will provide an explanation as to the collection methods of the data and information which was necessary to address the research objectives. As such, all data sources, instruments for research, data collection and analytical techniques, and research design, will be given. Research design There are many methodologies for collecting data, and it can be collected from many different sources. By research methodology, it is meant a set of techniques which are used in certain areas of research activity (Nachmias and Nachmias, 1996.) Methodologies do not fall into categories of right and wrong; it is the duty of the researcher to seek the most appropriate method, according to the questions being researched. Huberman and Miles, in 2002, in addition to Blaxter et al, in 2001, said that data collected is qualitative when it is in word and describes situations, circumstances of phenomenon, or individuals. Data are quantitative if they are represented in the form of numbers, counts, or measurements which attempt to provide precision to the observation set. Hence, the classification between quantitative and qualitative is most commonly used (Smeyers, 2002.) According to Denzin and Lincoln (1994) both quantitative and qualitative approaches can be applied within any philosophy of research. The approach that all genuine knowledge is ultimately grounded in sensory experience is called the positivist approach. This approach also says that knowledge can only be advanced through experimentation and observation. The interpretivist approach, in contrast, holds that only through the standpoint of individuals who are part of the action being investigated, can the social world be understood (Cohen et al. 2008.) Therefore, the nature of the problem being researched will have a direct effect on the choice of research methods being employed. Also, practical consideration, such as funding and time, may influence a researchers choices. Also, when applying the scientific method, the researcher must keep certain considerations in mind, such as the investigators own involvement in the usage of the results, the precision of measuring devices, time constrai nts for obtaining results, difficulty in designing experiments which adequately test hypotheses, and the relative complexity of the subject being investigated. In 1994, Gable reported that literature marked a distinction between the two approaches, but that the approaches are not mutually exclusive. Rather, sometimes researchers apply both. Qualitative and quantitative approaches and techniques may be conceptualized as opposite poles on a continuum (Gable, 1994.) The differences between the approaches are detailed on Table 4-1. Remenyi (1998) argued that the two approaches can be used together due to the complexity of answering how, why, and what questions. Selection Criteria Denzin and Lincoln (1994) defined qualitative research as follows: The word qualitative implies an emphasis on processes and meanings that are not rigorously examined or measured (if measured at all), in terms of quantitative, amount, intensity or frequency à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ Qualitative researchers stress the socially constructed nature of reality, the intimate relationship between the researcher and what is studied and the situational constraints that shape inquiry. Such researchers emphasize the value-laden nature of inquiry. They seek answers to questions given meaning (p. 124). Qualitative research sits within the phenomenological viewpoint, and involves at least some interaction between the researcher and the situation or individual which is being researched (Hussey and Hussey, 2003.) According to Morgan and Smircich (1980) the qualitative approach to research is not a set of techniques but an approach. As such, the appropriateness of using it is based on the phenomena being studied, and the questions being asked. Additionally, Kirk and Miller (1986) set forth the following steps to describe the qualitative approach to research: invention, discovery, interpretation, and finally, explanation. Other views of the qualitative research approach note its possible design constraints. For example, an individuals own account of attitudes, motivations, and behaviours, may be an influencing factor (Hakim, 2000.) Qualitative research has the problem of subjectivity. This is because the researcher is involved personally in the operation of the measurement tools (Walter and Gall, 1989.) There are several features which distinguish the nature and design of studies which use the qualitative approach, such as a holistic investigation of a particular phenomenon and the understanding of the study itself in its natural setting (Walter and Gall, 1989.) The very nature of the qualitative approach allows for some flexibility and responsiveness to multiple realities and complexity. Purposely selecting the sample, rather than selecting it randomly, can help the researcher avoid missing sample data which could otherwise be considered as outliers, and hence unimportant. Purposive sampling can allow the researcher to enrich the outcome of their research by designing a study which will include both non-typical and typical subjects (Tashakkori and Teddlie, 1998.) Hakim (2000) indicates that the validity of the data being collected has a direct effect on the strength of the qualitative research itself. Data are usually collected in adequate detail so as to allow the results to be considered correct, complete, true, and believable accounts of the views and experiences of the participants. However, sample size continues to be a concern. A qualitative project will normally have a lower number of participants, which cannot be taken as representative (Hakim 2000.) This fact remains even when a fair cross-section of subjects has be carefully assembled. Qualitative design methods usually include: 1) a case study providing data which describes the subject of the study; b) a meta-analysis designed to analyse statistical outcomes of previous research from diverse sources; c) research analysis on relevant administrative records; d) a record of focus group discussions which serve to bring together a group of informants, serving the investigated issue; and d) unstructured, semi-structured, or structured in-depth interviews (Silverman,2000; Kruger, 2001). Qualitative research can be considered an independent field of inquiry, as it is focused on studying objects in their natural settings. It also attempts to make sense of various phenomena in terms of their meanings as related to a set field (Denzin and Lincoln, 1994.) This form of research examines activity which is situated, in which an opportunity is presents to both participate in, and then reflect on, the knowledge production process (Flick, 2002.) Denzin and Lincoln (2003) state that the potential for the interpretation of phenmoena is presented by qualitative research which takes place in a natural setting. The use of multi-methods may be used to provide interpretation and focus on individuals (Denzin and Lincoln,1998.) Additionally, qualitative research usually includes interviews, the practical components of a case study, a life story, observations, and personal experience. It can also involve descriptions of routines or moments which were problematic, and even the meaning in the lives of individuals (Denzin and Lincoln, 2003). Qualitative studies, then, are ultimately concerned with both how its participants fit into their environments, and how they make sense of their individual experiences. Symbolic interactionism The fundamentals of symbolic interactionism as a perspective have been shaped by the work of Mead (1932; 1934) who is acknowledged for his alternate views toward understanding human society (Blumer, 1969; Charon, 2004). Blumer (1969) expanded on Meads work to develop symbolic interactionism into a perspective with a methodology to investigate and interpret the interactions of individuals in a social context. Because we live in a complex, industrialized society, and come from different ethnic, racial, and social class backgrounds, it is unrealistic to think that we all share the same sets of norms, beliefs, and values. People will often have competing and conflicting beliefs rather than shared goals and interests. Instead of being the product of consensus, organized behavior may be the result of self-interested negotiations between two or more parties or the product of coercion on the part of more powerful individuals. Herman-Kinneys observation reflects the appropriateness of symbolic interaction as a suitable framework for this study: acknowledgement that social contexts are complex entities that involve complex interactions between individuals and groups of individuals. The context of a university in Japan that employs individuals with a range of cultural and social attributes reflects Herman-Kinneys intention that people within a specific context carry conflicting beliefs and values, yet can function effectively as a group. Symbolic interactionism provides greater scope to explore such complexity. While other perspectives have made significant contributions to our understanding of the concept of identity, a noticeable absence from analysis of identity formation is the notion of the self as a separate concept to identity (Herman-Kinney, 2003: p.708; Beijaard et al., 2004). One of the fundamentals of symbolic interactionism is its emphasis on the notion of self and its relationship to the concept of identity. The notion of self tends to be overlooked in the literature on teacher identity largely because self and identity can tend to be used interchangeably. Other perspectives imply that an individual is a composite of multiple identities, a view shared by symbolic interactionism. Symbolic interactionism further contends that behind the multiple identities is the notion of self: a core entity that in many ways gives life to those multiple identities. This study is limited to exploring the nature of professional identities and not the nature of self. However, the distinction needs to be made that symbolic interactionism views self and identity as two separate but related concepts. THE EMERGENCE OF SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM Symbolic interactionism is a down-to-earth approach to the scientific study of human group life and human conduct. (Blumer, 1969: p.47) Symbolic interactionism is a perspective that emerged chiefly from the work of American tradition of pragmatism, philosophy and social psychology (Fidishun, 2002; Charon, 2004: p.28). It challenged the mechanistic world view and dualistic assumption of classic rationalism (Shalin, 1991: p.223). One of the most recognised challengers was Mead (1932; 1934) who viewed human group life as the essential condition for the emergence of core attributes that characterise an individual. Blumer (1969) identified the core attributes as consciousness, the mind, a world of objects, human beings as organisms possessing selves, and human conduct in the form of constructed acts. From these core attributes, Blumer (1969: p.6) proposed a number of basic ideas or root images to frame human societies: human groups or societies, social interaction, objects, the human being as an actor, human action, and the interconnection of the lines of action. Together, these root images represent the way in which symb olic interactionism views human society and conduct. Symbolic interactionism is used in this study to focus on the interactions of teachers with objects in a specific context. Core to symbolic interactionist principles is a focus on social interaction and meanings that result from the process of interpreting these interactions. The significance of symbolic interactionism, according to Rosenberg and Turner (1981), is that it places emphasis on researching real-life events, such as the practice of teaching. Within an educational context, Hargreaves (1995: p.11) argues that symbolic interactionism helps clarify why teachers (and others) do what they do and that à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ it addresses the practical realities rather than holding people to perspectives ideals or moral exhortation concerning human change and development. Exploring the identity of teachers who teach English in the context of this study lends itself well to the principles of symbolic interactionism, due to the highly interactive nature of the context that is rich in symbo ls: language, objects and social interactions. CORE IDEAS OF SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM As mentioned previously, symbolic interactionism emerged from the work of Mead who viewed human society differently from the traditionally held views of his time. Through his interpretation of Meads work of interpreting human society, Blumer developed three premises that characterise the fundamentals of symbolic interactionism. In his first of three premises, Blumer begins with the nature of meaning that human beings hold towards things that are socially defined. Human beings act toward things on the basis of the meanings that the things have for them (Blumer, 1969: p.2). According to Blumer, meaning is not implicit in humans at birth, instead emerges through social interactions and interpretations of those interactions. Meaning is established in communication (Mead, 1932). Blumers explanation illustrates a divergence from traditional approaches to explain meaning. By traditional, Blumer referred mainly to the fields of psychology and sociology, which were predominant at the time of his writing. From a psychological perspective, factors such as attitudes and conscious or unconscious motives were featured in attempts to understand human conduct, while sociological perspectives relied on factors such as social position, social pressures and cultural prescriptions in its attempt to explain human conduct (Blumer, 1969: p.3). According to Blumer (1969: p.3), the meanings that things have for human beings are central in their own right. That is, instead of focusing on factors that are alleged to produce behaviour, meaning is the focus of analysis itself. Th e process of meaning refers to the act of interpretation, which has implications on our understanding of human beings, human action and human association (Blumer, 1969: p.79). Blumer argues that other research traditions6 bypass a focus on meaning. It is either taken for granted and pushed aside as unimportant or it is regarded as a more neutral link between the factors responsible for human behaviour and the product of such factors (Blumer, 1969: p.3). According to Blumer, these perspectives are more concerned with the behaviour of individuals and with the factors regarded as producing the behaviour. However, while differences remain between symbolic interactionism and other research traditions, similarities are becoming more common, such as both stress the importance of language, the dynamic character of social and cultural life, and the unstable relations of difference (Dunn, 1997: p.689). The source of meaning emerges from social interactions between individuals and things within social contexts and situations. Blumers (ibid: p.3) explanation of things, or objects, reflects the down-to-earth nature of symbolic interactionism to include: physical objects (such as classrooms, office space, textbooks), other human beings (such as a wife, an officemate), categories of human beings (such as friends, management, students, native English-speaking teachers of English, native Japanese-speaking teachers of English), institutions (such as university, government), guiding ideals (such as individual independence, approach to teaching, university policy), activities of others (such as demands from management or requests from colleagues), THE APPROPRIATENESS OF SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM Symbolic interactionism is concerned with people, the meaning that people have towards things, and that these meanings are subjected to a process of interpretation within social contexts. Woods provides a convincing argument, claiming that: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ the emphasis is upon the construction of meanings and perspective, the adaptation to circumstances, the management of interests in the ebb and flow of countless interactions containing many ambiguities and conflicts, the strategies devised to promote those interests, and the negotiation with others interests that is a common feature of all teaching situations. (Woods, 1996: p.7) Woods account of symbolic interaction reflects the complexity of social situations, viewing symbolic interaction as a perspective that offers flexibility to explore the mysteries of social interaction in educational contexts. Woods was attracted to symbolic interactionism because it offered the kind of intellectual equipment needed to explore some of the mysteries of social interaction in the school (Woods, 1996: p.7). This study recognises that other research perspectives are equally suitable to explore the concept of professional identity. Symbolic interaction, however, allows meanings to be explored in the richness of the context: individuals hailing from broad cultural, educational and personal backgrounds. If identity is formed through relationships and interactions in a social context, a symbolic interactionist perspective is appropriate for exploring the negotiating of identities of EFL teachers in a Japanese higher education context. The nature of teaching English in higher e ducation in Japan is highly interactive between students and colleagues within a context rich in symbols open to complex processes of interaction and interpretation. CRITICISMS OF SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM Symbolic interactionism has changed considerably since its emergence as a perspective, becoming fragmented at times as a result of conflict from different schools of thought and interpretation (Fine, 1993). It, however, is not without its imperfections or its critics, of which many emerged from within the perspective itself as well as from other research traditions. The criticisms toward symbolic interactionism were more intense earlier in its history than of late due to its perceived departure from scientific methodology that was dominant at the time of its emergence. Criticisms emerged at a time when qualitative research was seen to be unscientific, with positivist research dominating approaches to research (Meltzer et al., 1975). Rogers (1973) accused interactionists of examining human interaction in a vacuum, focusing on small-scale face-to-face interaction, with little concern for its historical or social setting. Skidmore (1975) found that interactionists failed to explain why people consistently chose to act in given ways in certain situations. While the criticisms are valid, they were made at a time when symbolic interactionism had barely established itself as a theoretical perspective. There is an argument developing that the differences between symbolic interactionism and other perspectives are narrowing (Dunn, 1997). The criticism from within symbolic interactionism is characterised by the four main schools of thought that have been identified under the umbrella of symbolic interactionism: the Chicago school, the Iowa/Indiana school, ethnomethodology, and dramaturgy. The differences are largely methodological, between preferences for more humanistic, qualitative approaches to researching social interactions and those that were more scientific and quantitative (Meltzer et al., 1975). Blumer (1969) argues the case for a distinctive methodology in the study of human behavior that made modern society more intelligible (Meltzer et al., 1975). Regardless of methodology or school of thought, however, symbolic interactionism encompasses both a qualitative and quantitative tradition, reflecting an approach that strives to understand human behavior, not to predict and control it, nor to have more statistical knowledge of it (Musolf, 2003: p.91). Kuhn (1964) argued symbolic interactionism should reflect quantitative methodology, stressing the importance of unity of method in all scientific disciplines. Reflecting on its short history at the time, Kuhn (ibid) identified a number of problems that stunted the growth of symbolic interactionism and its acceptance by other research traditions as a credible research perspective. One of the main issues was lack of scientific credibility, which characterised the schism between the two schools. Kuhn attempted to elaborate Meads view on social behaviorism in an effort to establish a theory of self that was both testable and usable. Kuhns 20-point test to measure the self reflected the leaning toward scientific quantitative methodology of exploring self. According to Dunn (1997) there are critics who claim that symbolic interactionism provides little indication of sources of meanings. While these criticisms are valid, they were made not long after symbolic interactionism emerged as its own perspective and had yet to fully utilise the way in which other perspectives have developed over the past few decades. Dunn (1997) documents recent comparisons between symbolic interactionism and other research traditions to illustrate narrowing differences and shared fundamentals, such as importance of language. Likewise, Callero (2003) argues that recent sociological approaches to self within a symbolic interactionist paradigm reflect emphases on power, reflexivity, and social constructionism. Recent literature on teachers professional identities provides evidence that symbolic interactionism has survived the criticisms to prosper and prove it to be a suitable framework for this area of research (Swann, 1987; Beijaard et al., 2000). Methods of data collection Primary data There are several types of collection methods involved in qualitative research. The Interview Method The definition of an interview is the interchange, between two or more persons, of views on a topic of mutual interest. This enables both the discussion of individual points of view, and the expression of points of view (Cohen et al., 2008.) Cohen et al. note that the interview serves three distinct purposes: 1) as the primary means for gathering information that directly affect research objectives; 2) for the purpose of either testing a hypothesis, or suggesting a new one, also, as an explanatory method for the identification of variables and their relationships; 3) for use in conjunction with other methods. The three types of interviews are: unstructured, semi-structured, and structured. The unstructured interview contains questions which are open-ended, allowing the question to be adapted, according to the intelligence, beliefs, and understanding of the respondent. These interviews are more flexible and may be used for probing issues in greater depth than the other interview types, though it can take more time and involve greater difficulty to analyse (Kidder et al., 1986.) In the semi-structured interview, both open-ended and close-ended questions are employed. This means that not all questions are designed in advance. The semi-structured interview technique has some of the advantages of the other two techniques (Kidder et al., 1986.) This technique has the flexibility of allowing the interviewer to formulate new questions during the interview, as a result of the respondents answers to previous questions. This allows the interviewer to seek additional illumination and information. The interviewer usually has a framework of themes to be explored in a semi-structured interview (Blackman, 2002.) The structured interview, also known as the standardized interview, employs closed ended questions, and a standard sequence which is used in every interview. This approach has the aim of presenting the very same questions, in the very same order, in every interviewing session, and for every interviewee. Though this approach is not very flexible, its data is more easily analysed, and is considered to be more objective (Nachmias and Nachmias, 1996.) Blackman (2002) cites three essential characteristics which can be used to distinguish between the unstructured and the structured interview. 1) A highly structured interview requires that all interviewers present the same set of questions to all interviewees, with use of follow-up questions being prohibited. 2) Structured interviews form the foundation for tighter analysis. 3) Interviewers are trained to use both a priori rules and a standardized rating form in order to strictly rate and score question responses. Researchers choose between several strategies when planning an interview, including (Thomas, 2003, p. 63): An approach of loose questioning, which is meant to elicit the respondents interpretation of a general situation or circumstance. An approach of tight-questions, using a limited number of options (e.g. Yes/no, like/dislike) to discover a respondents preferences. An approach of converging-questions. This is designed to blend the advantages of the loose method and the tight method. At first broad questions are asked, in an open-ended manner. These are followed up with additional questions to more thoroughly explore the interviewees opinions. An approach of response-guided questions. This approach includes the interviewer beginning with prepared questions, which are spontaneously follow-up by questions created as logical extensions of the given answer. This strategy allows the researcher to delve more deeply into the respondents opinions relating to the issues presented in the original question. Focus group interviews A focus group is a special type of group which has more involved as its purpose than simply getting people to have a conversation. It is special in terms of its purpose, composition, size, and procedures, which guides, through interaction, to outcomes and data (Cohen et al., 2008.) Listening to information, and gathering information, is the purpose of this interview, as well as to understand peoples thoughts and feelings about particular issues (Krueger and Casey, 2000.) Focus groups can encourage an environment which allows participants to share their points of view and perceptions without pressure. Researchers may be able to identify patterns and trends from the group discussion. This may lead to a systematic and careful analysis (Krueger and Casey, 2000.) According to Cohen et al. (2008,) focus groups are good for: Orienting to a specific field of focus. The development of topics, schedules, and themes which can be used in subsequent questionnaires or interviews. Use insights and data, collected from the group, to generate hypotheses. Producing and evaluating data relating to differing subgroups of a given population. Assembling feedback related to previous studies. Kruger and Casey (2000) specified some of the characteristics of a focus group. A focus group involves a limited quantity of participants, so that every person has a chance to share; participants should have similar characteristics, so that the researchers my accomplish the purpose of the study; collection of qualitative data, of interest to the researcher, is the primary purpose of the focus group usually to discover the range of opinions between several groups; the group must have a focused discussion; the group should ultimately help to understand the topic of interest. Researchers (Krueger and Casey, 2000; and Cohen et al., 2008) indicate that the data which is collected from a focus group may be negatively influenced by two kinds of participant: a) close friends who may inhibit free expression on a given topic; b) participants who may be difficult to join with others. For this reason, it is considered more useful when the data is triangulated by using traditional interviewing forms, observation, documentation, and questionnaires (Cohen et al., 2008.) Observation methods Observation is routinely used in everyday life (Frank, 1999,) but it is multi- faceted as a scientific method (Wajnryb, 1992.) Bohem and Weinberg (1987) stated that techniques for observation are key to the developments in the sciences, and this is because data which is collected is more likely to lead to decisions, conclusions, and new ideas. Obaidat et al (2002) made the claim that many phenomena and ideas, which are the subjects of study interviews and questionnaires, are selected because of the need to test them and understand them by field researchers. So, observation is considered a prime tool for the gaining of both information and experience. According to Cohen et al (2008,) observation enables researchers to gain understanding of the context which is being investigated, to be more inductive and open-ended, and to see certain aspects which otherwise may have been missed. It also allows for the discovery of issues that participants may not have wanted to discuss in their interviews. While observation in a social context can easily be accomplished, scientific observation may require more detailed planning, and defined recording protocols (Summerhill and Taylor, 1992.) Cohen et al (2008) refer to observations in many settings: physical, human, group or individual, gender, class, and even interaction in settings which may be formal or informal, planned or unplanned, verbal or non-verbal. Additional settings would include programme settings, such as school resources, curricula, and style. Secondary data The analysis of secondary data, involving the analysis of data collected by other institutions and researchers, will be part of the basis for this research. Additionally, by treating this undertaking with diligence and care, an efficient method or learning about research questions, which are both time saving and cost effective, will be gained. The major sources of secondary data, which are used in this research, are: Official stats. This comprises of statistics collected by various bureaus, departments, agencies, and the government. Because this information is easy to obtain and easy to comprehend, it is considered an important secondary data source. Scholarly Journals (Peer Reviewed) As they contain reports of both original research and reports of experimentation, scholarly journals are important to this study. Experts review scholarly journals in order to check their accuracy, originality, and hence relevance. Literature Review Articles these articles review and arrange original research about a particular subject of interest. For this research the researchers consulted online databases and the library, in order to find the requisite relevant pieces of data to be used in this research. Data analysis Qualitative research findings, methods, disciplinary orientation, and types of findings represent great diversity (Yardley 2000). Qualitative research has many traditions. These include, as a partial listing, cultural ethnography (Agar 1996; Quinn 2005), institutional ethnography (Campbell and Gregor 2004), analyses for historical comparison (Skocpol 2003), case studies (Yin 1994), focus groups (Krueger and Casey 2000), interviews (in-depth) (Glaser and Strauss 1967; McCracken 1988; Patton 2002;

Applying Platos Allegory of the Cave Essay -- Plato, Philosophy, Phil

Applying Plato's Allegory of the Cave to Oedipus Rex, Hamlet,and Thomas Becket Plato was one of the greatest philosophers of all time. He is recognized all over the world as one of the greatest minds of all time. Knowledge is required under compulsion has not hold on the mind.(Durant 24). Plato's dialogues are the fruit of a rare mind; but the could not have kept their perennial freshness if they had not somehow succeeded in expressing he problems and the convictions that are common to Plato's age and to all later ages. Genius alone is not enough; or perhaps it were wiser to say that we recognize genius only in the power of divination that overleaps the boundaries of a special time and place.(Jowett xi). Although Plato did not come up with the Allegory of the Cave, Socrates did, he transcribed it. In their own ways, Oedipus Rex, Hamlet, and Thomas Becket, prove that one must break the chains of the cave to discover the truth. In view of Plato's Allegory of the Cave, several literary works contain characters who break from the shadows of the cave to witn ess "the real world". Plato's Allegory of the Cave, presents Socrates instructing one of his students to imagine that there was a cave that was totally dark, except from the light that comes from the entrance and from a fire. The student was instructed then to imagine that the inhabitants of the cave have their necks and legs chained to the wall, impossible for the inhabitants to move. The people who control the cave place objects in front of the fire so that the inhabitants of the cave only see the shadows of the objects that the people want them to see. The chained inhabitants never get to see the real objects, only the distorted images of the objects. Furthermore, the inhabitants of the cave perceive the distorted objects as real, not the actual objects as being real. Socrates, then tells the student to imagine if the inhabitants of the cave were suddenly freed of the chains. The inhabitants would be in agonizing pain, for the first time in their lives the individuals can stand and move their heads. Their bodies are not used to being in such positions. The inhabitants of the cave, now are able to behold the light glimmering outside the cave. The inhabitants who were only adapted to only darkness, perceive light. The light stabs at their eyes, it is too painful for these individ... ...the cave and witness the light of the real world, one will never get to see the harsh truth of their destiny. Works Cited Gibson, Anna Lee, "Allegory of the Cave." Advanced Placement English Writing Manual and Literary Guide. Ed. Jewell Worley and Frank Gentry. Wise: Wise County Vocational-Technical Center. 1992. The Canterbury Story. Anglicans Online. Http://www.anglican.org/online/uk-europe/lambeth/canterbury.html. 3 Dec., 1997. Jowett, Benjamin. The Dialogues of Plato. Ed. William Chase Green. New York: Liveright Publishing Company. 1954. Durant, Will. "The live and opinions of the greater philosophers." The Story of Philosophy. New York: Simon and Schuster Rockefeller Center. 1961. Shakespeare, William. "Hamlet." England in Literature. Illinois: Scott, Foresman, and Company. 1987. Becket Murder. Hyperhistory. Online. Http://www.hyperhistory.com/online_n2/ppersons5_n2/beck.html Stravinsky, Igor. Oedipus Rex . Online. Http://www.coc.ca/98stra-synopsis.htm. Jaspers, Carl. "Plato." The Great Philosophers. Ed. Hannah Arendt. New York: harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. 1962. Jowett, B. The Dialogues of Plato. New York: Random House. 1937.

Das Projekt einer globalen Ethik und die afrikanische Philosophie :: German Essays

Das Projekt einer globalen Ethik und die afrikanische Philosophie ZUSAMMENFASSUNG: Die Frage nach einer globalen Ethik stellt sich heute verschà ¤rft unfgrund der neuen Qualità ¤t gegenseitiger Abhà ¤ngigkeit der einzelnen Staaten und Regionen beruhend auf einer eng verknà ¼pften Weltwirtschaft und dem weltumspannenden Netz modernen Kommunikationssysteme. Diese Verknà ¼pfung zeigt sich am deutlichsten in der Vernetzung transnationaler Konzerne, deren Produktionsstà ¤tten nicht mehr an nationale Territorien gebunden sind. Die Entstehung einer globalen Interdependenz hà ¤ngt jedoch nicht nur mit à ¶konomischen Entwicklungen oder der neuen Effizienz der Kommunikationstechniken zusammen, sondern auch mit der in diesem Jahrhundert entstandenen Mà ¶glichkeit einer à ¶kologischen oder milità ¤rischen Selbstzerstà ¶rung der Erde durch den Menschen. I. Einleitung Die Frage nach einer globalen Ethik stellt sich heute verschà ¤rft aufgrund der neuen Qualità ¤t gegenseitiger Abhà ¤ngigkeit der einzelnen Staaten und Regionen beruhend auf einer eng verknà ¼pften Weltwirtschaft und dem weltumspannenden Netz moderner Kommunikationssysteme. Diese Verknà ¼pfung zeigt sich am deutlichsten in der Vernetzung transnationaler Konzerne, deren Produktionsstà ¤tten nicht mehr an nationale Territorien gebunden sind. Die Entstehung einer globalen Interdependenz hà ¤ngt jedoch nicht nur mit à ¶konomischen Entwicklungen oder der neuen Effizienz der Kommunikationstechniken zusammen, sondern auch mit der in diesem Jahrhundert entstandenen Mà ¶glichkeit einer à ¶kologischen oder milità ¤rischen Selbstzerstà ¶rung der Erde durch den Menschen. Oder wie der deutsche Philosoph Karl-Otto Apel es ausdrà ¼ckt: „... das Bedà ¼rfnis nach einer universalen, d.h. fà ¼r die menschliche Gesellschaft insgesamt verbindlichen Ethik [war] noch nie so dringend, wie in unserem Zeitalter einer durch die technologischen Konsequenzen der Wissenschaft hergestellten planetaren Einheitszivilisation."(1) Aus der Notwendigkeit einer solchen Ethik kann aber noch nicht auf deren Mà ¶glichkeit geschlossen werden. Deshalb scheint mir die Frage nach der Mà ¶glichkeit einer globalen Ethik zu den wichtigsten unserer Zeit zu gehà ¶ren. Verschiedene Ethikprojekte, wie die Diskursethik in Deutschland oder die Befreiungsethik in Lateinamerika, haben nun den Versuch unternommen, eine Ethik mit Anspruch auf universale Gà ¼ltigkeit zu begrà ¼nden, die kulturelle, religià ¶se, politische etc. Unterschiede transzendiert. Solche Projekte mà ¼ssen einer grà ¼ndlichen Prà ¼fung unterzogen werden, wozu vor allem auch eine intersubjektive ÃÅ"berprà ¼fung von Vertretern unterschiedlicher kultureller Kontexte gehà ¶rt. Meine These ist, daß eine Ethik solange keinen Anspruch auf universale Gà ¼ltigkeit erheben kann, solange sie nicht einer interkulturellen Prà ¼fung unterzogen wurde, oder wie der à ¶sterreichische Philosoph Franz Wimmer es formuliert:„... halte keine philosophische These fà ¼r gut begrà ¼ndet, an deren Zustandekommen nur Menschen einer einzigen kulturellen Tradition beteiligt waren."(2) Dieser „kategorische Imperativ" der interkulturellen Philosophie ist natà ¼rlich kein ausreichendes Kriterium zur Bestimmung des Wahrheitscharakters einer Theorie, aber wohl ein unverzichtbares. In einer solchen „interkulturellen Prà ¼fung" sollen Theorien auf ihre Relevanz fà ¼r verschiedene Kontexte und Orientierungssysteme hin geprà ¼ft und mit anderen Theorien aus anderen Kontexten konfrontiert werden.

King Epsilon

As a student, I think that It Is more enjoyable if a teacher explains the lessons In a certain subject with some twists or making stories that would hook the interests of a student. It is not only for students to be interested but also the information is easy to understand and remember. Humor helps things suck In our minds. The story teaching real analysis in the land of making is a great idea of Julie Barnes. Teachers who tell good stories can make subject interesting or easier to relate to. It helps the student to do better In the exams Like what the students of Julie Barnes experienced.She said that roughly 90% of her students told her that the story had made the material much easier for them to understand, remember, and use. So every year, she used the story and she always got the same positive results. It helps us to understand some definitions found in a standard introductory real analysis. The story had made learning calculus simple because it is stated in a child friendly way . The author used the deferent symbols In calculus as Its character In the story The equations there are easy to remember.For Students it is more interesting eating tales and stories more than memorizing all the equations and definitions in calculus without twists. When you read tales or stories, you can easily remember the equations by recalling the story of King Epsilon. Julie Barnes is Just so great. It's not easy to make a tale or a story especially when you are relating It to math definitions or a certain equations. It Is an Informative story that teaches us a lot of things about calculus. The story was about a certain tale of convergence in the real line. There was a king named King Epsilon who lived In the Castle Analysis.HIS wife named Queen Delta already died. There are many citizens living on a subset of a real line. In the country, there was a caste system, and everyone is ranked. The king himself would not allow them to call him by a natural number. He was never part of the natural order of things. King Epsilon had a collection of laws of the kingdom. It is a brilliant idea to a lot of problems that the citizens of the real line have dealt with for centuries. He had a Rule 1 which is the convergence day. During convergence day, King Epsilon would decree the most citizens must travel o a certain place.King Epsilon realized that it is very important for all of his decrees to be obeyed. So he declared that If the subjects didn't comply with a convergence day there would be an extra tax imposed on all the citizens. He asked some of his advisors about this and came up with the following observation. There was never a need to Impose the tax for noncompliance of Rule 1 . HIS Rule 2 Is Cauchy days. He realized that having too many convergence days would actually be harder on the citizens on the real line than not having enough convergence days. He met a young authenticate named Cauchy came to King Epsilon with an Idea.He suggested that instead of specifyin g a town and having a convergence day, these could be simply be days when the citizens have to get together. For any given distance epsilon the lower class citizens would have to be within epsilon of everyone else. There comes this year of hurricanes. It was not uncommon for king epsilon to order mass evacuations from the real line into a parallel universe. King Epsilon proposed was the Hurricane Evacuation Policy where the government must find a parallel universe to evacuate as soon as possible. All citizens must travel to the new world on magic carpets via a function.Once a functions is chosen, there are two things are of great importance to every citizen: The size of the warp zone that needs to be traveled through the entire world and how magic carpets are measured. There are 4 cases. Case 1 is under perfect conditions, average citizens should be sent to safety in a continuous fashion. Case 2 is the Police officers, rescue workers, and medical personnel are sent wherever they are needed, even if this forces them to travel together. Case 3 is if the function moves in a uniformly continuous fashion, the overspent will mass-produce the magic carpets.Lastly, the Case 4 Convergence days are not affected by evacuations. King Epsilon was a great king who is very kind and an intelligent, brave man. His love for Queen Delta is definitely wonderful for he has named a certain area to his queen so he could remember her all the time or whenever he went at that area of the country. Every character was really been a part of the calculus subject. The story doesn't have an ending. Maybe King himself will integrate new ideas into his current kingdom to help students with differentiation and integration.

Language & state of chaos Essay

The lexical choices made by Beckett in the first act show many things, such as the relationship between Estragon and Vladimir, and the confusion of the characters as to the time and the meaning of their actions. The main characters, Estragon and Vladimir, switch roles continually, so not using language as an expression of their selves, therefore the words used show no badge of identity. This shows interchangeability in the characters, so keeping the audience searching for the characters’ own distinctive personality. This role switching that not even the characters’ roles/ personalities are certain. This confusion is increased with the characters’ inclination to talk in adjacency pairs like they are both speaking from the same train of thought To say that the language is in a state of chaos suggests there is utter confusion in the play, the audience can hear and understand the individual words being said, but cannot put them into a relevant context or meaning. This ‘chaos’ is seen frequently throughout Vladimir and Estragon’s conversations; although taking turns with one another while speaking, they do not engage in a conventional conversation, one character talks about one topic, while the other talks about a different subject all together. The first moment I have chosen reflects this chaotic language; the two characters talk about the bible, beginning in conventional adjacency pairs, Vladimir: â€Å"Did you ever read the bible? † Estragon: â€Å"The bible†¦ I must have looked at it† but then the conversation starts to waver on Estragon’s part – Vladimir: â€Å"Do you remember the story? † Estragon: â€Å"No. † Vladimir: â€Å"Shall I tell it to you? † Estragon: â€Å"No. † And finally, the language and conversation between the two becomes chaotic – Estragon: â€Å"Saved form what? † Vladimir: â€Å"Hell. † Estragon: â€Å"I’m going. † This deterioration in the exchanges between the two characters shows the pettiness of them both; they seem to squabble about anything, no matter how inane it seems to the audience. This can be seen as due to the lack of meaning or activity in their lives, with them using any method of keeping boredom at bay. This interaction between the two characters shows their abuse of Grice’s maxim of relevance, as one character’s speech holds no relevance to that of the other’s. In this moment in the play there is a lot of uncertainty for both the characters and the audience, which Beckett creates mainly via the language used by the two main protagonists. The characters are unsure about what the other is talking about, Estragon: â€Å"Who? † Vladimir: â€Å"What? † Estragon: â€Å"What’s all this about? â€Å", and they are also uncertain of what really happens in the bible, Vladimir: â€Å"But all four were there†¦ why believe him rather than the others? † The audience is made uncertain of the meaning of the character’s talking about the bible, it is near the start of the play so they do not know what is to come. My second moment is different form my first as Estragon and Vladimir are now joined by two passing characters, Pozzo and Lucky, although Lucky does not speak till later on in their meeting. Pozzo speaks of how much pressure Lucky, his knook, puts on him, this is all an act on his part, but Estragon and Vladimir believe him, they repeat Pozzo’s words to add definition and to show their feelings of sadness towards him, Pozzo: â€Å"It’s terrible†¦ he must go†¦ I’m going mad†¦ I cant bear it†¦ any longer†¦ † Vladimir: â€Å"He can’t bear it. † Estragon: â€Å"Any longer. † Vladimir: â€Å"He’s going mad. † Estragon: â€Å"It’s terrible. † This makes Estragon and Vladimir look rather naive as they believe Pozzo straight away and accuse Lucky of ‘crucifying’ Pozzo, but are then told by Pozzo that he was lying. Estragon and Vladimir’s language in this moment is still chaotic, repeating themselves and each other, and showing confusion at what each other said, using the word ‘what’ several times as a response. Their ‘adjacency pairs’ are jarred and do not seem to fit together, Vladimir: â€Å"I don’t think so† Estragon: â€Å"What? † Vladimir: â€Å"I don’t know† Estragon: â€Å"Ask him†. They then go on to talk mundanely about the evening, which turns into babblings of irrelevant words, Vladimir: â€Å"Worse than the pantomime. † Estragon: â€Å"The circus† Vladimir: â€Å"The music-hall. † Estragon: â€Å"The circus† This is an example of their words and thoughts reflecting a single unit, as if it were just one person speaking, showing their relationship to be so close they are starting to think alike. This chaotic language also reflects the uncertainty theme, which runs through the play, shown through the character’s lexis and actions (seen in the secondary text). This chaos is shown when Pozzo appears to have lost his pipe, Estragon says â€Å"He’s a scream. He’s lost his dudeen. † This is a word coined by Beckett which does not seem to have any meaning, showing how Beckett uses language to confuse the audience, as it seems slightly ridiculous how Estragon makes up a word purely to rhyme with ‘scream’. The chaotic language in the play seems mainly on a humorous level, for example, in the second moment chosen Vladimir rushes off to relieve himself, while doing this Estragon shouts â€Å"end of corridor on the left†, even though both the characters and audience are aware they are in the middle of nowhere with just a tree. Both of the moments chosen show language to be in a state of chaos, thus supporting the opinion that nothing is certain in the play, although there are certain factors that make this statement debatable which should be taken into account, for example, Vladimir and Estragon’s relationship, they have known each other for a long time as they share memories etc. It can also be said that the certainty of some topics in the play is left up to the audience to understand, through the situation and the characters.