NLN NEX VERBAL QUESTIONS

Extract:

The area known as the Bermuda Triangle has become such a part of popular culture that it can be difficult to separate fact from fiction. The interest first began when five Navy planes vanished in 1945, officially resulting from ?causes or reasons unknown.? The explanations about other accidents in the Triangle range from the scientific to the supernatural. Researchers have never been able to find anything truly mysterious about what happens in the Bermuda Triangle, if there even is a Bermuda Trian le. What is more, one of the biggest challenges in considering the phenomenon is deciding how much area actually represents the Bermuda Triangle. Most consider the Triangle to stretch from Miami out to Puerto Rico and to include the island of Bermuda. Others expand the area to include all of the Caribbean islands and to extend eastward as far as the Azores, which are closer to Europe than they are to North America. The problem with having a larger Bermuda Triangle is that it increases the odds of accidents. There is near-constant travel, by ship and by plane, across the Atlantic, and accidents are expected to occur. In fact, the Bermuda Triangle happens to fall within one of the busiest navigational regions in the world, and the reality of greater activity creates the possibility for more to go wrong. Shipping records suggest that there is not a greater than average loss of vessels within the Bermuda Triangle, and many researchers have argued that the reputation of the Triangle makes any accident seem out of the ordinary. In fact, most accidents fall within the expected margin of error. The increase in ships from East Asia no doubt contributes to an increase in accidents. And as for the story of the Navy planes that disappeared within the Triangle, many researchers now conclude that it was the result of mistakes on the part of the pilots who flew into storm clouds, likely became discomposed, and then simply got lost.

Extract:

In the United States, the foreign language requirement for high school graduation is decided at the state level. This means the requirement varies, with some states deciding to forego a foreign language requirement altogether (www.ncssfl.org). It is necessary that these states reconsider their position and amend their requirements to reflect compulsory completion of a course of one or more foreign languages. Studying a foreign language has become increasingly important for the global economy. As technology continues to make international business relations increasingly easy, people need to keep up by increasing their communication capabilities. High school graduates with foreign language credits have been shown to have an increased college acceptance rate. In addition, students who have mastered more than one language typically find themselves in greater demand when they reach the job market. Students who did not study a foreign language often find themselves unable to obtain a job at all.

Extract:

In the United States, the foreign language requirement for high school graduation is decided at the state level. This means the requirement varies, with some states deciding to forego a foreign language requirement altogether (www.ncssfl.org). It is necessary that these states reconsider their position and amend their requirements to reflect compulsory completion of a course of one or more foreign languages. Studying a foreign language has become increasingly important for the global economy. As technology continues to make international business relations increasingly easy, people need to keep up by increasing their communication capabilities. High school graduates with foreign language credits have been shown to have an increased college acceptance rate. In addition, students who have mastered more than one language typically find themselves in greater demand when they reach the job market. Students who did not study a foreign language often find themselves unable to obtain a job at all.

Extract:

In 1603, Queen Elizabeth I of England died. She had never married and had no heir, sothe throne passed to a distant relative: James Stuart, the son of Elizabeth?s cousin and onetime rival for the throne, Mary, Queen of Scots. James was crowned King James | of England.At the time, he was also King James VI of Scotland, and the combination of roles wouldcreate a spirit of conflict that haunted the two nations for generations to come.The conflict developed as a result of rising tensions among the people within thenations, as well as between them. Scholars in the 21st century are far too hasty in dismissingthe role of religion in political disputes, but religion undoubtedly played a role in theproblems that faced England and Scotland. By the time of James Stuart?s succession to the English throne, the English people had firmly embraced the teachings of Protestant theology. Similarly, the Scottish Lowlands was decisively Protestant. In the Scottish Highlands, however, the clans retained their Catholic faith. James acknowledged the Church of England and still sanctioned the largely Protestant translation of the Bible that still bears his name. James's son King Charles I proved himself to be less committed to the Protestant Church of England. Charles married the Catholic Princess Henrietta Maria of France, and there were suspicions among the English and the Lowland Scots that Charles was quietly a Catholic. Charles?s own political troubles extended beyond religion in this case, and he was beheaded in 1649. Eventually, his son King Charles II would be crowned, and this Charles is believed to have converted secretly to the Catholic Church. Charles II died without a legitimate heir, and his brother James ascended to the throne as King James II. James was recognized to be a practicing Catholic, and his commitment to Catholicism would prove to be his downfall. James?s wife Mary Beatrice lost a number of children during their infancy, and when she became pregnant again in 1687 the public became concerned. If James had a son, that son would undoubtedly be raised a Catholic, and the English people would not stand for this. Mary gave birth to a son, but the story quickly circulated that the royal child had died and the child named James?s heir was a foundling smuggled in. James,his wife, and his infant son were forced to flee; and James?s Protestant daughter Mary wascrowned the queen.In spite of a strong resemblance to the king, the young James was generally rejectedamong the English and the Lowland Scots, who referred to him as ?the Pretender.? But inthe Highlands the Catholic princeling was welcomed. He inspired a group known asJacobites, to reflect the Latin version of his name. His own son Charles, known affectionatelyas Bonnie Prince Charlie, would eventually raise an army and attempt to recapture what hebelieved to be his throne. The movement was soundly defeated at the Battle of Culloden in1746, and England and Scotland have remained ostensibly Protestant ever since.

Extract:

In 1603, Queen Elizabeth I of England died. She had never married and had no heir, sothe throne passed to a distant relative: James Stuart, the son of Elizabeth?s cousin and onetime rival for the throne, Mary, Queen of Scots. James was crowned King James | of England.At the time, he was also King James VI of Scotland, and the combination of roles wouldcreate a spirit of conflict that haunted the two nations for generations to come.The conflict developed as a result of rising tensions among the people within thenations, as well as between them. Scholars in the 21st century are far too hasty in dismissingthe role of religion in political disputes, but religion undoubtedly played a role in theproblems that faced England and Scotland. By the time of James Stuart?s succession to the English throne, the English people had firmly embraced the teachings of Protestant theology. Similarly, the Scottish Lowlands was decisively Protestant. In the Scottish Highlands, however, the clans retained their Catholic faith. James acknowledged the Church of England and still sanctioned the largely Protestant translation of the Bible that still bears his name. James's son King Charles I proved himself to be less committed to the Protestant Church of England. Charles married the Catholic Princess Henrietta Maria of France, and there were suspicions among the English and the Lowland Scots that Charles was quietly a Catholic. Charles?s own political troubles extended beyond religion in this case, and he was beheaded in 1649. Eventually, his son King Charles II would be crowned, and this Charles is believed to have converted secretly to the Catholic Church. Charles II died without a legitimate heir, and his brother James ascended to the throne as King James II. James was recognized to be a practicing Catholic, and his commitment to Catholicism would prove to be his downfall. James?s wife Mary Beatrice lost a number of children during their infancy, and when she became pregnant again in 1687 the public became concerned. If James had a son, that son would undoubtedly be raised a Catholic, and the English people would not stand for this. Mary gave birth to a son, but the story quickly circulated that the royal child had died and the child named James?s heir was a foundling smuggled in. James,his wife, and his infant son were forced to flee; and James?s Protestant daughter Mary wascrowned the queen.In spite of a strong resemblance to the king, the young James was generally rejectedamong the English and the Lowland Scots, who referred to him as ?the Pretender.? But inthe Highlands the Catholic princeling was welcomed. He inspired a group known asJacobites, to reflect the Latin version of his name. His own son Charles, known affectionatelyas Bonnie Prince Charlie, would eventually raise an army and attempt to recapture what hebelieved to be his throne. The movement was soundly defeated at the Battle of Culloden in1746, and England and Scotland have remained ostensibly Protestant ever since.

Extract:

Global warming and the depletion of natural resources are constant threats to the future of our planet. All people have a responsibility to be proacti Global warming and the depletion of natural resources are constant threats to the future of our planet. All people have a responsibility to be proactive participants in the fight to save Earth by working now to conserve resources for later. Participation begins with our everyday choices. From what you buy to what you do to how much you use, your decisions affect the planet and everyone around you. Now is the time to take action. When choosing what to buy, look for sustainable products made from renewable or recycled resources. The packaging of the products you buy is just as important as the products themselves. Is the item minimally packaged in a recycled container? How did the product reach the store? Locally grown food and other products manufactured within your community are the best choices. The fewer miles a product traveled to reach you, the fewerresources it required.You can continue to make a difference for the planet in how you use what you boughtand the resources you have available. Remember the locally grown food you purchased?Don't pile it on your plate at dinner. Food that remains on your plate is a wasted resource,and you can always go back for seconds. You should try to be aware of your consumption ofwater and energy. Turn off the water when you brush your teeth, and limit your showers tofive minutes. Turn off the lights, and don?t leave appliances or chargers plugged in when notin use.Together, we can use less, waste less, recycle more, and make the right choices. It may be the only chance we have.ve participants in the fight to save Earth by working now to conserve resources for later. Participation begins with our everyday choices. From what you buy to what you do to how much you use, your decisions affect the planet and everyone around you. Now is the time to take action. When choosing what to buy, look for sustainable products made from renewable or recycled resources. The packaging of the products you buy is just as important as the products themselves. Is the item minimally packaged in a recycled container? How did the product reach the store? Locally grown food and other products manufactured within your community are the best choices. The fewer miles a product traveled to reach you, the fewer resources it required. You can continue to make a difference for the planet in how you use what you bought and the resources you have available. Remember the locally grown food you purchased? Don't pile it on your plate at dinner. Food that remains on your plate is a wasted resource, and you can always go back for seconds. You should try to be aware of your consumption of water and energy. Turn off the water when you brush your teeth, and limit your showers to five minutes. Turn off the lights, and don?t leave appliances or chargers plugged in when not in use. Together, we can use less, waste less, recycle more, and make the right choices. It may be the only chance we have.

Extract:

Global warming and the depletion of natural resources are constant threats to the future of our planet. All people have a responsibility to be proacti Global warming and the depletion of natural resources are constant threats to the future of our planet. All people have a responsibility to be proactive participants in the fight to save Earth by working now to conserve resources for later. Participation begins with our everyday choices. From what you buy to what you do to how much you use, your decisions affect the planet and everyone around you. Now is the time to take action. When choosing what to buy, look for sustainable products made from renewable or recycled resources. The packaging of the products you buy is just as important as the products themselves. Is the item minimally packaged in a recycled container? How did the product reach the store? Locally grown food and other products manufactured within your community are the best choices. The fewer miles a product traveled to reach you, the fewerresources it required.You can continue to make a difference for the planet in how you use what you boughtand the resources you have available. Remember the locally grown food you purchased?Don't pile it on your plate at dinner. Food that remains on your plate is a wasted resource,and you can always go back for seconds. You should try to be aware of your consumption ofwater and energy. Turn off the water when you brush your teeth, and limit your showers tofive minutes. Turn off the lights, and don?t leave appliances or chargers plugged in when notin use.Together, we can use less, waste less, recycle more, and make the right choices. It may be the only chance we have.ve participants in the fight to save Earth by working now to conserve resources for later. Participation begins with our everyday choices. From what you buy to what you do to how much you use, your decisions affect the planet and everyone around you. Now is the time to take action. When choosing what to buy, look for sustainable products made from renewable or recycled resources. The packaging of the products you buy is just as important as the products themselves. Is the item minimally packaged in a recycled container? How did the product reach the store? Locally grown food and other products manufactured within your community are the best choices. The fewer miles a product traveled to reach you, the fewer resources it required. You can continue to make a difference for the planet in how you use what you bought and the resources you have available. Remember the locally grown food you purchased? Don't pile it on your plate at dinner. Food that remains on your plate is a wasted resource, and you can always go back for seconds. You should try to be aware of your consumption of water and energy. Turn off the water when you brush your teeth, and limit your showers to five minutes. Turn off the lights, and don?t leave appliances or chargers plugged in when not in use. Together, we can use less, waste less, recycle more, and make the right choices. It may be the only chance we have.

Extract:

In the United States, where we have more land than people, it is not at all difficult for persons in good health to make money. In this comparatively new In the United States, where we have more land than people, it is not at all difficult forpersons in good health to make money. In this comparatively new field, there are so manyavenues of success open, so many vocations which are not crowded, that any person ofeither sex who is willing, at least for the time being, to engage in any respectable occupationthat offers, may find lucrative employment.Those who really desire to attain an independence, have only to set their minds upon it,and adopt the proper means, as they do in regard to any other object which they wish toaccomplish, and the thing is easily done. But however easy it may be found to make money;I have no doubt many of my hearers will agree it is the most difficult thing in the world tokeep it. The road to wealth is, as Dr. Franklin truly says, "as plain as the road to the mill.? Itconsists simply in expending less than we earn; that seems to be a very simple problem. Mr.Micawber, one of those happy creations of the genial Dickens, puts the case in a strong lightwhen he says that to have annual income of twenty pounds per annum, and spend twenty pounds and sixpence, is to be the most miserable of men; whereas, to have an income of only twenty pounds, and spend but nineteen pounds and sixpence is to be the happiest of mortals. Many of my readers may say, "we understand this: this is economy, and we know economy is wealth; we know we can't eat our cake and keep it also." Yet I beg to say that perhaps more cases of failure arise from mistakes on this point than almost any other. The fact is, many people think they understand economy when they really do not. field, there are so many avenues of success open, so many vocations which are not crowded, that any person of either sex who is willing, at least for the time being, to engage in any respectable occupation that offers, may find lucrative employment. Those who really desire to attain an independence, have only to set their minds upon it, and adopt the proper means, as they do in regard to any other object which they wish to accomplish, and the thing is easily done. But however easy it may be found to make money; I have no doubt many of my hearers will agree it is the most difficult thing in the world to keep it. The road to wealth is, as Dr. Franklin truly says, "as plain as the road to the mill.? It consists simply in expending less than we earn; that seems to be a very simple problem. Mr. Micawber, one of those happy creations of the genial Dickens, puts the case in a strong light when he says that to have annual income of twenty pounds per annum, and spend twenty pounds and sixpence, is to be the most miserable of men; whereas, to have an income of only twenty pounds, and spend but nineteen pounds and sixpence is to be the happiest of mortals. Many of my readers may say, "we understand this: this is economy, and we know economy is wealth; we know we can't eat our cake and keep it also." Yet I beg to say that perhaps more cases of failure arise from mistakes on this point than almost any other. The fact is, many people think they understand economy when they really do not.

Extract:

In the United States, where we have more land than people, it is not at all difficult for persons in good health to make money. In this comparatively new In the United States, where we have more land than people, it is not at all difficult forpersons in good health to make money. In this comparatively new field, there are so manyavenues of success open, so many vocations which are not crowded, that any person ofeither sex who is willing, at least for the time being, to engage in any respectable occupationthat offers, may find lucrative employment.Those who really desire to attain an independence, have only to set their minds upon it,and adopt the proper means, as they do in regard to any other object which they wish toaccomplish, and the thing is easily done. But however easy it may be found to make money;I have no doubt many of my hearers will agree it is the most difficult thing in the world tokeep it. The road to wealth is, as Dr. Franklin truly says, "as plain as the road to the mill.? Itconsists simply in expending less than we earn; that seems to be a very simple problem. Mr.Micawber, one of those happy creations of the genial Dickens, puts the case in a strong lightwhen he says that to have annual income of twenty pounds per annum, and spend twenty pounds and sixpence, is to be the most miserable of men; whereas, to have an income of only twenty pounds, and spend but nineteen pounds and sixpence is to be the happiest of mortals. Many of my readers may say, "we understand this: this is economy, and we know economy is wealth; we know we can't eat our cake and keep it also." Yet I beg to say that perhaps more cases of failure arise from mistakes on this point than almost any other. The fact is, many people think they understand economy when they really do not. field, there are so many avenues of success open, so many vocations which are not crowded, that any person of either sex who is willing, at least for the time being, to engage in any respectable occupation that offers, may find lucrative employment. Those who really desire to attain an independence, have only to set their minds upon it, and adopt the proper means, as they do in regard to any other object which they wish to accomplish, and the thing is easily done. But however easy it may be found to make money; I have no doubt many of my hearers will agree it is the most difficult thing in the world to keep it. The road to wealth is, as Dr. Franklin truly says, "as plain as the road to the mill.? It consists simply in expending less than we earn; that seems to be a very simple problem. Mr. Micawber, one of those happy creations of the genial Dickens, puts the case in a strong light when he says that to have annual income of twenty pounds per annum, and spend twenty pounds and sixpence, is to be the most miserable of men; whereas, to have an income of only twenty pounds, and spend but nineteen pounds and sixpence is to be the happiest of mortals. Many of my readers may say, "we understand this: this is economy, and we know economy is wealth; we know we can't eat our cake and keep it also." Yet I beg to say that perhaps more cases of failure arise from mistakes on this point than almost any other. The fact is, many people think they understand economy when they really do not.

Extract:

My gentleness and good behaviour had gained so far on the emperor and his court, and indeed upon the army and people in general, that I began to conceive hopes of getting my liberty in a short time. I took all possible methods to cultivate this favourable disposition. The natives came, by degrees, to be less apprehensive of any danger from me. I would some My gentleness and good behaviour had gained so far on theemperor and his court, and indeed upon the army and peoplein general, that I began to conceive hopes of getting myliberty in a short time. I took all possible methods to cultivate this favourable disposition. The natives came, by degrees, tobe less apprehensive of any danger from me. I wouldsometimes lie down, and let five or six of them dance on myhand; and at last the boys and girls would venture to comeand play at hide-and-seek in my hair. I had now made a good progress in understanding and speaking the language. Theemperor had a mind one day to entertain me with several ofthe country shows, wherein they exceed all nations I haveknown, both for exterity and magnificence. I was divertedwith none so much as that of the rope-dancers,performedupon a slender white thread, extended about two feet, andtwelve inches from the ground. Upon which I shall desireliberty, with the reader?s patience, to enlarge a little.This diversion is only practised by those persons who arecandidates for great employments, and high favour at court.They are trained in this art from their youth, and are notalways of noble birth, or liberal education. When a reatoffice is vacant, either by death or disgrace (which oftenhappens,) five or six of those candidates petition the emperorto entertain his majesty and the court with a dance on therope; and whoever jumps the highest, without falling,succeeds in the office. Very often the chief ministersthemselves are commanded to show their skill, and toconvince the emperor that they have not lost their faculty. Flimnap, the treasurer, is allowed to cut a caper on thestraight rope, at least an inch higher than any other lord in thewhole empire. I have seen him do the summerset severaltimes together, upon a trencher fixed on a rope which is nothicker than a common packthread in England. My friendReldresal, principal secretary for private affairs, is, in myopinion, if I am not partial, the second after the treasurer; therest of the great officers are much upon a par.times lie down, and let five or six of them dance on my hand; and at last the boys and girls would venture to come and play at hide-and-seek in my hair. I had now made a good progress in understanding and speaking the language. The emperor had a mind one day to entertain me with several of the country shows, wherein they exceed all nations I have known, both for dexterity and magnificence. I was diverted with none so much as that of the rope-dancers, performed upon a slender white thread, extended about two feet, and twelve inches from the ground. Upon which I shall desire liberty, with the reader?s patience, to enlarge a little. This diversion is only practised by those persons who are candidates for great employments, and high favour at court. They are trained in this art from their youth, and are not always of noble birth, or liberal education. When a great office is vacant, either by death or disgrace (which often happens,) five or six of those candidates petition the emperor to entertain his majesty and the court with a dance on the rope; and whoever jumps the highest, without falling, succeeds in the office. Very often the chief ministers themselves are commanded to show their skill, and to convince the emperor that they have not lost their faculty. Flimnap, the treasurer, is allowed to cut a caper on the straight rope, at least an inch higher than any other lord in the whole empire. I have seen him do the summerset several times together, upon a trencher fixed on a rope which is no thicker than a common packthread in England. My friend Reldresal, principal secretary for private affairs, is, in my opinion, if I am not partial, the second after the treasurer; the rest of the great officers are much upon a par.

Extract:

My gentleness and good behaviour had gained so far on the emperor and his court, and indeed upon the army and people in general, that I began to conceive hopes of getting my liberty in a short time. I took all possible methods to cultivate this favourable disposition. The natives came, by degrees, to be less apprehensive of any danger from me. I would some My gentleness and good behaviour had gained so far on theemperor and his court, and indeed upon the army and peoplein general, that I began to conceive hopes of getting myliberty in a short time. I took all possible methods to cultivate this favourable disposition. The natives came, by degrees, tobe less apprehensive of any danger from me. I wouldsometimes lie down, and let five or six of them dance on myhand; and at last the boys and girls would venture to comeand play at hide-and-seek in my hair. I had now made a good progress in understanding and speaking the language. Theemperor had a mind one day to entertain me with several ofthe country shows, wherein they exceed all nations I haveknown, both for exterity and magnificence. I was divertedwith none so much as that of the rope-dancers,performedupon a slender white thread, extended about two feet, andtwelve inches from the ground. Upon which I shall desireliberty, with the reader?s patience, to enlarge a little.This diversion is only practised by those persons who arecandidates for great employments, and high favour at court.They are trained in this art from their youth, and are notalways of noble birth, or liberal education. When a reatoffice is vacant, either by death or disgrace (which oftenhappens,) five or six of those candidates petition the emperorto entertain his majesty and the court with a dance on therope; and whoever jumps the highest, without falling,succeeds in the office. Very often the chief ministersthemselves are commanded to show their skill, and toconvince the emperor that they have not lost their faculty. Flimnap, the treasurer, is allowed to cut a caper on thestraight rope, at least an inch higher than any other lord in thewhole empire. I have seen him do the summerset severaltimes together, upon a trencher fixed on a rope which is nothicker than a common packthread in England. My friendReldresal, principal secretary for private affairs, is, in myopinion, if I am not partial, the second after the treasurer; therest of the great officers are much upon a par.times lie down, and let five or six of them dance on my hand; and at last the boys and girls would venture to come and play at hide-and-seek in my hair. I had now made a good progress in understanding and speaking the language. The emperor had a mind one day to entertain me with several of the country shows, wherein they exceed all nations I have known, both for dexterity and magnificence. I was diverted with none so much as that of the rope-dancers, performed upon a slender white thread, extended about two feet, and twelve inches from the ground. Upon which I shall desire liberty, with the reader?s patience, to enlarge a little. This diversion is only practised by those persons who are candidates for great employments, and high favour at court. They are trained in this art from their youth, and are not always of noble birth, or liberal education. When a great office is vacant, either by death or disgrace (which often happens,) five or six of those candidates petition the emperor to entertain his majesty and the court with a dance on the rope; and whoever jumps the highest, without falling, succeeds in the office. Very often the chief ministers themselves are commanded to show their skill, and to convince the emperor that they have not lost their faculty. Flimnap, the treasurer, is allowed to cut a caper on the straight rope, at least an inch higher than any other lord in the whole empire. I have seen him do the summerset several times together, upon a trencher fixed on a rope which is no thicker than a common packthread in England. My friend Reldresal, principal secretary for private affairs, is, in my opinion, if I am not partial, the second after the treasurer; the rest of the great officers are much upon a par.

Extract:

Three years ago, I think there were not many bird-lovers in the United States, who believed it ossible to prevent the total extinction of both egrets from our fauna. All the known rookeries accessible to plume-hunters had been totally destroyed. Two years ago, the secret discovery of several small, hidden colonies prompted William Dutc Three years ago, I think there were not many bird-lovers inthe United States, who believed it possible to prevent thetotal extinction of both egrets from our fauna. All the knownrookeries accessible to plume-hunters had been totallydestroyed. Two years ago, the secret discovery of severalsmall, hidden colonies prompted William Dutcher, residentof the National Association of Audubon Societies, and Mr. T.Gilbert Pearson, Secretary, to attempt the protection of thosecolonies. With a fund contributed for the purpose, wardenswere hired and duly commissioned. As previously stated, oneof those wardens was shot dead in cold blood by a plumehunter. The task of guarding swamp rookeries from theattacks of money-hungry desperadoes to whom the accursedplumes were worth their weight in gold, is a very chancyproceeding. There is now one warden in Florida who says that"before they get my rookery they will first have to get me." Thus far the protective work of the Audubon Association hasbeen successful. Now there are twenty colonies, whichcontain all told, about 5,000 egrets and about 120,000 heronsand ibises which are guarded by the Audubon wardens. Oneof the most important is on Bird Island, a mile out in Orange Lake, central Florida, and it is ably defended by Oscar E.Baynard. To-day, the plume hunters who do not dare to raidthe guarded rookeries are trying to study out the lines of flightof the birds, to and from their feeding-grounds, and shootthem in transit. Their motto is?"Anything to beat the law, and get the plumes." It is there that the state of Florida shouldtake part in the war. The success of this campaign is attested by the fact that lastyear a number of egrets were seen in eastern Massachusetts?for the first time in many years. And so to-day the questionis, can the wardens continue to hold the plume-hunters atbay?her, President of the National Association of Audubon Societies, and Mr. T. Gilbert Pearson, Secretary, to attempt the protection of those colonies. With a fund contributed for the purpose, wardens were hired and duly commissioned. As previously stated, one of those wardens was shot dead in cold blood by a plume hunter. The task of guarding swamp rookeries from the attacks of money-hungry desperadoes to whom the accursed plumes were worth their weight in gold, is a very chancy proceeding. There is now one warden in Florida who says that "before they get my rookery they will first have to get me." Thus far the protective work of the Audubon Association has been successful. Now there are twenty colonies, which contain all told, about 5,000 egrets and about 120,000 herons and ibises which are guarded by the Audubon wardens. One of the most important is on Bird Island, a mile out in Orange Lake, central Florida, and it is ably defended by Oscar E. Baynard. To-day, the plume hunters who do not dare to raid the guarded rookeries are trying to study out the lines of flight of the birds, to and from their feeding-grounds, and shoot them in transit. Their motto is?"Anything to beat the law, and get the plumes." It is there that the state of Florida should take part in the war. The success of this campaign is attested by the fact that last year a number of egrets were seen in eastern Massachusetts ?for the first time in many years. And so to-day the question is, can the wardens continue to hold the plume-hunters at bay?

Extract:

Three years ago, I think there were not many bird-lovers in the United States, who believed it possible to prevent the total extinction of both egrets from our fauna. All the known rookeries accessible to plume-hunters had been totally destroyed. Two years ago, the secret discovery of several small, hidden colonies prompted William Dutcher, President of the National Association of Audubon Societies, and Mr. T. Gilbert Pearson, Secretary, to attempt the protection of those colonies. With a fund contributed for the purpose, wardens were hired and duly commissioned. As previously stated, one of those wardens was shot dead in cold blood by a plume hunter. The task of guarding swamp rookeries from the attacks of money-hungry desperadoes to whom the accursed plumes were worth their weight in gold, is a very chancy proceeding. There is now one warden in Florida who says that "before they get my rookery they will first have to get me." Thus far the protective work of the Audubon Association has been successful. Now there are twenty colonies, which contain all told, about 5,000 egrets and about 120,000 herons and ibises which are guarded by the Audubon wardens. One of the most important is on Bird Island, a mile out in Orange Lake, central Florida, and it is ably defended by Oscar E. Baynard. To-day, the plume hunters who do not dare to raid the guarded rookeries are trying to study out the lines of flight of the birds, to and from their feeding-grounds, and shoot them in transit. Their motto is?"Anything to beat the law, and get the plumes." It is there that the state of Florida should take part in the war. The success of this campaign is attested by the fact that last year a number of egrets were seen in eastern Massachusetts for the first time in many years. And so to-day the question is, can the wardens continue to hold the plume-hunters at bay?

Extract:

Insects as a whole are preeminently creatures of the land and the air. This is shown not only by the possession of wings by a vast majority of the class, but by the mode of breathing to which reference has already been made, a system of branching air-tubes carrying atmospheric air with its ombustion-supportin Insects as a whole are preeminently creatures of the land andthe air. This is shown not nly by the possession of wings by avast majority of the class, but by the mode of breathing towhich reference has already been made, a system ofbranching air-tubes carrying atmospheric air with its combustion-supporting oxygen to all the insect's tissues. Theair gains access to these tubes through a number of pairedair-holes or spiracles, arranged segmentally in series. It is of great interest to find that, nevertheless, a number ofinsects spend much of their time under water. This is true ofnot a few in the perfect winged state, as for example aquaticbeetles and water-bugs ('boatmen' and 'scorpions') whichhave some way of protecting their spiracles when ubmerged, and, possessing usually the power of flight, can pass onoccasion from pond or stream to upper air. But it is advisablein connection with our present subject to dwell especially onsome insects that remain continually under water till they areready to undergo their final moult and attain the winged state, which they pass entirely in the air. The preparatoryinstars of such insects are aquatic; the dult instar is aerial. Allmay-flies, dragon-flies, and caddis-flies, many beetles andtwo-winged flies, and a few moths thus divide their life-storybetween the water and the air. For the present we confine attention to the Stone-flies, the May-flies, and the Dragonflies, three well-known orders of insects respectively called bysystematists the Plecoptera, the Ephemeroptera and the Odonata. In the case of many insects that have aquatic larvae, the latterare provided with some arrangement for enabling them toreach atmospheric air through the surface-film of the water.But the larva of a stone-fly, a dragon-fly, or a may-fly isadapted more completely than these for aquatic life; it can, by means of gills of some kind, breathe the air dissolved in water.g oxygen to all the insect's tissues. The air gains access to these tubes through a number of paired air-holes or spiracles, arranged segmentally in series. It is of great interest to find that, nevertheless, a number of insects spend much of their time under water. This is true of not a few in the perfect winged state, as for example aquatic beetles and water-bugs ('boatmen' and 'scorpions') which have some way of protecting their spiracles when submerged, and, possessing usually the power of flight, can pass on occasion from pond or stream to upper air. But it is advisable in connection with our present subject to dwell especially on some insects that remain continually under water till they are ready to undergo their final moult and attain the winged state, which they pass entirely in the air. The preparatory instars of such insects are aquatic; the adult instar is aerial. All may-flies, dragon-flies, and caddis-flies, many beetles and two-winged flies, and a few moths thus divide their life-story between the water and the air. For the present we confine attention to the Stone-flies, the May-flies, and the Dragonflies, three well-known orders of insects respectively called by systematists the Plecoptera, the Ephemeroptera and the Odonata. In the case of many insects that have aquatic larvae, the latter are provided with some arrangement for enabling them to reach atmospheric air through the surface-film of the water. But the larva of a stone-fly, a dragon-fly, or a may-fly is adapted more completely than these for aquatic life; it can, by means of gills of some kind, breathe the air dissolved in water.

Extract:

Insects as a whole are preeminently creatures of the land and the air. This is shown not only by the possession of wings by a vast majority of the class, but by the mode of breathing to which reference has already been made, a system of branching air-tubes carrying atmospheric air with its ombustion-supportin Insects as a whole are preeminently creatures of the land andthe air. This is shown not nly by the possession of wings by avast majority of the class, but by the mode of breathing towhich reference has already been made, a system ofbranching air-tubes carrying atmospheric air with its combustion-supporting oxygen to all the insect's tissues. Theair gains access to these tubes through a number of pairedair-holes or spiracles, arranged segmentally in series. It is of great interest to find that, nevertheless, a number ofinsects spend much of their time under water. This is true ofnot a few in the perfect winged state, as for example aquaticbeetles and water-bugs ('boatmen' and 'scorpions') whichhave some way of protecting their spiracles when ubmerged, and, possessing usually the power of flight, can pass onoccasion from pond or stream to upper air. But it is advisablein connection with our present subject to dwell especially onsome insects that remain continually under water till they areready to undergo their final moult and attain the winged state, which they pass entirely in the air. The preparatoryinstars of such insects are aquatic; the dult instar is aerial. Allmay-flies, dragon-flies, and caddis-flies, many beetles andtwo-winged flies, and a few moths thus divide their life-storybetween the water and the air. For the present we confine attention to the Stone-flies, the May-flies, and the Dragonflies, three well-known orders of insects respectively called bysystematists the Plecoptera, the Ephemeroptera and the Odonata. In the case of many insects that have aquatic larvae, the latterare provided with some arrangement for enabling them toreach atmospheric air through the surface-film of the water.But the larva of a stone-fly, a dragon-fly, or a may-fly isadapted more completely than these for aquatic life; it can, by means of gills of some kind, breathe the air dissolved in water.g oxygen to all the insect's tissues. The air gains access to these tubes through a number of paired air-holes or spiracles, arranged segmentally in series. It is of great interest to find that, nevertheless, a number of insects spend much of their time under water. This is true of not a few in the perfect winged state, as for example aquatic beetles and water-bugs ('boatmen' and 'scorpions') which have some way of protecting their spiracles when submerged, and, possessing usually the power of flight, can pass on occasion from pond or stream to upper air. But it is advisable in connection with our present subject to dwell especially on some insects that remain continually under water till they are ready to undergo their final moult and attain the winged state, which they pass entirely in the air. The preparatory instars of such insects are aquatic; the adult instar is aerial. All may-flies, dragon-flies, and caddis-flies, many beetles and two-winged flies, and a few moths thus divide their life-story between the water and the air. For the present we confine attention to the Stone-flies, the May-flies, and the Dragonflies, three well-known orders of insects respectively called by systematists the Plecoptera, the Ephemeroptera and the Odonata. In the case of many insects that have aquatic larvae, the latter are provided with some arrangement for enabling them to reach atmospheric air through the surface-film of the water. But the larva of a stone-fly, a dragon-fly, or a may-fly is adapted more completely than these for aquatic life; it can, by means of gills of some kind, breathe the air dissolved in water.

Extract:

In the quest to understand existence, modern philosophers must question if humans can fully comprehend the world. Classical western approaches to philosophy tend to hold that one can understand something, be it an event or object, by standing outside of the phenomena and observing it. It is then by unbiased observation that one can grasp the details of the world. This seems to hold true for many things. Scientists conduct experiments and record their findings, and thus many natural phenomena become comprehendible. However, several of these observations were possible because humans used tools in order to make these discoveries. This may seem like an extraneous matter. After all, people invented things like microscopes and telescopes in order to enhance their capacity to view cells or the movement of stars. W In the quest to understand existence, modern philosophers must question if humans can fully c In the quest to understand existence, modern philosophers mustquestion if humans can fully comprehend the world. Classical western approaches to philosophy tend to hold that one canunderstand something, be it an event or object, by standing outsideof the phenomena and observing it. It is then by unbiasedobservation that one can grasp the details of the world. This seemsto hold true for many things. Scientists conduct experiments andrecord their findings, and thus many natural phenomena become comprehendible. However, several of these observations werepossible because humans used tools in order to make thesediscoveries. This may seem like an extraneous matter. After all, people inventedthings like microscopes and telescopes in order to enhance theircapacity to view cells or the movement of stars. While humans arestill capable of seeing things, the question remains if human beingshave the capacity to fully observe and see the world in order tounderstand it. It would not be an impossible stretch to argue thatwhat humans see through a microscope is not the exact thing itself,but a human interpretation of it.This would seem to be the case in the ?Business of the Holes?experiment conducted by Richard Feynman. To study the wayelectrons behave, Feynman set up a barrier with two holes and aplate. The plate was there to indicate how many times the electronswould pass through the hole(s). Rather than casually observe theelectrons acting under normal circumstances, Feynman discoveredthat electrons behave in two totally different ways depending onwhether or not they are observed. The electrons that were observedhad passed through either one of the holes or were caught on theplate as particles. However, electrons that weren?t observed acted aswaves instead of particles and assed through both holes. Thisindicated that electrons have a dual nature. Electrons seen by thehuman eye act like particles, while unseen electrons act like waves ofenergy. This dual nature of the electrons presents a conundrum. Whilehumans now have a better understanding of electrons, the factremains that people cannot entirely perceive how electrons behavewithout the use of instruments. We can only observe one of thementioned behaviors, which only provides a partial understanding ofthe entire function of electrons. Therefore, we?re forced to askourselves whether the world we observe is objective or if it issubjectively perceived by humans. Or, an alternative question: canman understand the world only through machines that will allow them to observe natural phenomena?Both questions humble man?s capacity to grasp the world. However,those ideas don?t take into account that many phenomena have beenproven by human beings without the use of machines, such as thediscovery of gravity. Like all philosophical questions, whether man?sreason and observation alone can understand the universe can beapproached from many angles.omprehend the world. Classical western approaches to philosophy tend to hold that one can understand something, be it an event or object, by standing outside of the phenomena and observing it. It is then by unbiased observation that one can grasp the details of the world. This seems to hold true for many things. Scientists conduct experiments and record their findings, and thus many natural phenomena become comprehendible. However, several of these observations were possible because humans used tools in order to make these discoveries. This may seem like an extraneous matter. After all, people invented things like microscopes and telescopes in order to enhance their capacity to view cells or the movement of stars. While humans are still capable of seeing things, the question remains if human beings have the capacity to fully observe and see the world in order to understand it. It would not be an impossible stretch to argue that what humans see through a microscope is not the exact thing itself, but a human interpretation of it. This would seem to be the case in the ?Business of the Holes? experiment conducted by Richard Feynman. To study the way electrons behave, Feynman set up a barrier with two holes and a plate. The plate was there to indicate how many times the electrons would pass through the hole(s). Rather than casually observe the electrons acting under normal circumstances, Feynman discovered that electrons behave in two totally different ways depending on whether or not they are observed. The electrons that were observed had passed through either one of the holes or were caught on the plate as particles. However, electrons that weren?t observed acted as waves instead of particles and passed through both holes. This indicated that electrons have a dual nature. Electrons seen by the human eye act like particles, while unseen electrons act like waves of energy. This dual nature of the electrons presents a conundrum. While humans now have a better understanding of electrons, the fact remains that people cannot entirely perceive how electrons behave without the use of instruments. We can only observe one of the mentioned behaviors, which only provides a partial understanding of the entire function of electrons. Therefore, we?re forced to ask ourselves whether the world we observe is objective or if it is subjectively perceived by humans. Or, an alternative question: can man understand the world only through machines that will allow them to observe natural phenomena? Both questions humble man?s capacity to grasp the world. However, those ideas don?t take into account that many phenomena have been proven by human beings without the use of machines, such as the discovery of gravity. Like all philosophical questions, whether man?s reason and observation alone can understand the universe can be approached from many angles. hile humans are still capable of seeing things, the question remains if human beings have the capacity to fully observe and see the world in order to understand it. It would not be an impossible stretch to argue that what humans see through a microscope is not the exact thing itself, but a human interpretation of it. This would seem to be the case in the ?Business of the Holes? experiment conducted by Richard Feynman. To study the way electrons behave, Feynman set up a barrier with two holes and a plate. The plate was there to indicate how many times the electrons would pass through the hole(s). Rather than casually observe the electrons acting under normal circumstances, Feynman discovered that electrons behave in two totally different ways depending on whether or not they are observed. The electrons that were observed had passed through either one of the holes or were caught on the plate as particles. However, electrons that weren?t observed acted as waves instead of particles and passed through both holes. This indicated that electrons have a dual nature. Electrons seen by the human eye act like particles, while unseen electrons act like waves of energy. This dual nature of the electrons presents a conundrum. While humans now have a better understanding of electrons, the fact remains that people cannot entirely perceive how electrons behave without the use of instruments. We can only observe one of the mentioned behaviors, which only provides a partial understanding of the entire function of electrons. Therefore, we?re forced to ask ourselves whether the world we observe is objective or if it is subjectively perceived by humans. Or, an alternative question: can man understand the world only through machines that will allow them to observe natural phenomena? Both questions humble man?s capacity to grasp the world. However, those ideas don?t take into account that many phenomena have been proven by human beings without the use of machines, such as the discovery of gravity. Like all philosophical questions, whether man?s reason and observation alone can understand the universe can be approached from many angles.

Extract:

In the quest to understand existence, modern philosophers must question if humans can fully comprehend the world. Classical western approaches to philosophy tend to hold that one can understand something, be it an event or object, by standing outside of the phenomena and observing it. It is then by unbiased observation that one can grasp the details of the world. This seems to hold true for many things. Scientists conduct experiments and record their findings, and thus many natural phenomena become comprehendible. However, several of these observations were possible because humans used tools in order to make these discoveries. This may seem like an extraneous matter. After all, people invented things like microscopes and telescopes in order to enhance their capacity to view cells or the movement of stars. W In the quest to understand existence, modern philosophers must question if humans can fully c In the quest to understand existence, modern philosophers mustquestion if humans can fully comprehend the world. Classical western approaches to philosophy tend to hold that one canunderstand something, be it an event or object, by standing outsideof the phenomena and observing it. It is then by unbiasedobservation that one can grasp the details of the world. This seemsto hold true for many things. Scientists conduct experiments andrecord their findings, and thus many natural phenomena become comprehendible. However, several of these observations werepossible because humans used tools in order to make thesediscoveries. This may seem like an extraneous matter. After all, people inventedthings like microscopes and telescopes in order to enhance theircapacity to view cells or the movement of stars. While humans arestill capable of seeing things, the question remains if human beingshave the capacity to fully observe and see the world in order tounderstand it. It would not be an impossible stretch to argue thatwhat humans see through a microscope is not the exact thing itself,but a human interpretation of it.This would seem to be the case in the ?Business of the Holes?experiment conducted by Richard Feynman. To study the wayelectrons behave, Feynman set up a barrier with two holes and aplate. The plate was there to indicate how many times the electronswould pass through the hole(s). Rather than casually observe theelectrons acting under normal circumstances, Feynman discoveredthat electrons behave in two totally different ways depending onwhether or not they are observed. The electrons that were observedhad passed through either one of the holes or were caught on theplate as particles. However, electrons that weren?t observed acted aswaves instead of particles and assed through both holes. Thisindicated that electrons have a dual nature. Electrons seen by thehuman eye act like particles, while unseen electrons act like waves ofenergy. This dual nature of the electrons presents a conundrum. Whilehumans now have a better understanding of electrons, the factremains that people cannot entirely perceive how electrons behavewithout the use of instruments. We can only observe one of thementioned behaviors, which only provides a partial understanding ofthe entire function of electrons. Therefore, we?re forced to askourselves whether the world we observe is objective or if it issubjectively perceived by humans. Or, an alternative question: canman understand the world only through machines that will allow them to observe natural phenomena?Both questions humble man?s capacity to grasp the world. However,those ideas don?t take into account that many phenomena have beenproven by human beings without the use of machines, such as thediscovery of gravity. Like all philosophical questions, whether man?sreason and observation alone can understand the universe can beapproached from many angles.omprehend the world. Classical western approaches to philosophy tend to hold that one can understand something, be it an event or object, by standing outside of the phenomena and observing it. It is then by unbiased observation that one can grasp the details of the world. This seems to hold true for many things. Scientists conduct experiments and record their findings, and thus many natural phenomena become comprehendible. However, several of these observations were possible because humans used tools in order to make these discoveries. This may seem like an extraneous matter. After all, people invented things like microscopes and telescopes in order to enhance their capacity to view cells or the movement of stars. While humans are still capable of seeing things, the question remains if human beings have the capacity to fully observe and see the world in order to understand it. It would not be an impossible stretch to argue that what humans see through a microscope is not the exact thing itself, but a human interpretation of it. This would seem to be the case in the ?Business of the Holes? experiment conducted by Richard Feynman. To study the way electrons behave, Feynman set up a barrier with two holes and a plate. The plate was there to indicate how many times the electrons would pass through the hole(s). Rather than casually observe the electrons acting under normal circumstances, Feynman discovered that electrons behave in two totally different ways depending on whether or not they are observed. The electrons that were observed had passed through either one of the holes or were caught on the plate as particles. However, electrons that weren?t observed acted as waves instead of particles and passed through both holes. This indicated that electrons have a dual nature. Electrons seen by the human eye act like particles, while unseen electrons act like waves of energy. This dual nature of the electrons presents a conundrum. While humans now have a better understanding of electrons, the fact remains that people cannot entirely perceive how electrons behave without the use of instruments. We can only observe one of the mentioned behaviors, which only provides a partial understanding of the entire function of electrons. Therefore, we?re forced to ask ourselves whether the world we observe is objective or if it is subjectively perceived by humans. Or, an alternative question: can man understand the world only through machines that will allow them to observe natural phenomena? Both questions humble man?s capacity to grasp the world. However, those ideas don?t take into account that many phenomena have been proven by human beings without the use of machines, such as the discovery of gravity. Like all philosophical questions, whether man?s reason and observation alone can understand the universe can be approached from many angles. hile humans are still capable of seeing things, the question remains if human beings have the capacity to fully observe and see the world in order to understand it. It would not be an impossible stretch to argue that what humans see through a microscope is not the exact thing itself, but a human interpretation of it. This would seem to be the case in the ?Business of the Holes? experiment conducted by Richard Feynman. To study the way electrons behave, Feynman set up a barrier with two holes and a plate. The plate was there to indicate how many times the electrons would pass through the hole(s). Rather than casually observe the electrons acting under normal circumstances, Feynman discovered that electrons behave in two totally different ways depending on whether or not they are observed. The electrons that were observed had passed through either one of the holes or were caught on the plate as particles. However, electrons that weren?t observed acted as waves instead of particles and passed through both holes. This indicated that electrons have a dual nature. Electrons seen by the human eye act like particles, while unseen electrons act like waves of energy. This dual nature of the electrons presents a conundrum. While humans now have a better understanding of electrons, the fact remains that people cannot entirely perceive how electrons behave without the use of instruments. We can only observe one of the mentioned behaviors, which only provides a partial understanding of the entire function of electrons. Therefore, we?re forced to ask ourselves whether the world we observe is objective or if it is subjectively perceived by humans. Or, an alternative question: can man understand the world only through machines that will allow them to observe natural phenomena? Both questions humble man?s capacity to grasp the world. However, those ideas don?t take into account that many phenomena have been proven by human beings without the use of machines, such as the discovery of gravity. Like all philosophical questions, whether man?s reason and observation alone can understand the universe can be approached from many angles.

Extract:

In the quest to understand existence, modern philosophers must question if humans can fully comprehend the world. Classical western approaches to philosophy tend to hold that one can understand something, be it an event or object, by standing outside of the phenomena and observing it. It is then by unbiased observation that one can grasp the details of the world. This seems to hold true for many things. Scientists conduct experiments and record their findings, and thus many natural phenomena become comprehendible. However, several of these observations were possible because humans used tools in order to make these discoveries. This may seem like an extraneous matter. After all, people invented things like microscopes and telescopes in order to enhance their capacity to view cells or the movement of stars. W In the quest to understand existence, modern philosophers must question if humans can fully c In the quest to understand existence, modern philosophers mustquestion if humans can fully comprehend the world. Classical western approaches to philosophy tend to hold that one canunderstand something, be it an event or object, by standing outsideof the phenomena and observing it. It is then by unbiasedobservation that one can grasp the details of the world. This seemsto hold true for many things. Scientists conduct experiments andrecord their findings, and thus many natural phenomena become comprehendible. However, several of these observations werepossible because humans used tools in order to make thesediscoveries. This may seem like an extraneous matter. After all, people inventedthings like microscopes and telescopes in order to enhance theircapacity to view cells or the movement of stars. While humans arestill capable of seeing things, the question remains if human beingshave the capacity to fully observe and see the world in order tounderstand it. It would not be an impossible stretch to argue thatwhat humans see through a microscope is not the exact thing itself,but a human interpretation of it.This would seem to be the case in the ?Business of the Holes?experiment conducted by Richard Feynman. To study the wayelectrons behave, Feynman set up a barrier with two holes and aplate. The plate was there to indicate how many times the electronswould pass through the hole(s). Rather than casually observe theelectrons acting under normal circumstances, Feynman discoveredthat electrons behave in two totally different ways depending onwhether or not they are observed. The electrons that were observedhad passed through either one of the holes or were caught on theplate as particles. However, electrons that weren?t observed acted aswaves instead of particles and assed through both holes. Thisindicated that electrons have a dual nature. Electrons seen by thehuman eye act like particles, while unseen electrons act like waves ofenergy. This dual nature of the electrons presents a conundrum. Whilehumans now have a better understanding of electrons, the factremains that people cannot entirely perceive how electrons behavewithout the use of instruments. We can only observe one of thementioned behaviors, which only provides a partial understanding ofthe entire function of electrons. Therefore, we?re forced to askourselves whether the world we observe is objective or if it issubjectively perceived by humans. Or, an alternative question: canman understand the world only through machines that will allow them to observe natural phenomena?Both questions humble man?s capacity to grasp the world. However,those ideas don?t take into account that many phenomena have beenproven by human beings without the use of machines, such as thediscovery of gravity. Like all philosophical questions, whether man?sreason and observation alone can understand the universe can beapproached from many angles.omprehend the world. Classical western approaches to philosophy tend to hold that one can understand something, be it an event or object, by standing outside of the phenomena and observing it. It is then by unbiased observation that one can grasp the details of the world. This seems to hold true for many things. Scientists conduct experiments and record their findings, and thus many natural phenomena become comprehendible. However, several of these observations were possible because humans used tools in order to make these discoveries. This may seem like an extraneous matter. After all, people invented things like microscopes and telescopes in order to enhance their capacity to view cells or the movement of stars. While humans are still capable of seeing things, the question remains if human beings have the capacity to fully observe and see the world in order to understand it. It would not be an impossible stretch to argue that what humans see through a microscope is not the exact thing itself, but a human interpretation of it. This would seem to be the case in the ?Business of the Holes? experiment conducted by Richard Feynman. To study the way electrons behave, Feynman set up a barrier with two holes and a plate. The plate was there to indicate how many times the electrons would pass through the hole(s). Rather than casually observe the electrons acting under normal circumstances, Feynman discovered that electrons behave in two totally different ways depending on whether or not they are observed. The electrons that were observed had passed through either one of the holes or were caught on the plate as particles. However, electrons that weren?t observed acted as waves instead of particles and passed through both holes. This indicated that electrons have a dual nature. Electrons seen by the human eye act like particles, while unseen electrons act like waves of energy. This dual nature of the electrons presents a conundrum. While humans now have a better understanding of electrons, the fact remains that people cannot entirely perceive how electrons behave without the use of instruments. We can only observe one of the mentioned behaviors, which only provides a partial understanding of the entire function of electrons. Therefore, we?re forced to ask ourselves whether the world we observe is objective or if it is subjectively perceived by humans. Or, an alternative question: can man understand the world only through machines that will allow them to observe natural phenomena? Both questions humble man?s capacity to grasp the world. However, those ideas don?t take into account that many phenomena have been proven by human beings without the use of machines, such as the discovery of gravity. Like all philosophical questions, whether man?s reason and observation alone can understand the universe can be approached from many angles. hile humans are still capable of seeing things, the question remains if human beings have the capacity to fully observe and see the world in order to understand it. It would not be an impossible stretch to argue that what humans see through a microscope is not the exact thing itself, but a human interpretation of it. This would seem to be the case in the ?Business of the Holes? experiment conducted by Richard Feynman. To study the way electrons behave, Feynman set up a barrier with two holes and a plate. The plate was there to indicate how many times the electrons would pass through the hole(s). Rather than casually observe the electrons acting under normal circumstances, Feynman discovered that electrons behave in two totally different ways depending on whether or not they are observed. The electrons that were observed had passed through either one of the holes or were caught on the plate as particles. However, electrons that weren?t observed acted as waves instead of particles and passed through both holes. This indicated that electrons have a dual nature. Electrons seen by the human eye act like particles, while unseen electrons act like waves of energy. This dual nature of the electrons presents a conundrum. While humans now have a better understanding of electrons, the fact remains that people cannot entirely perceive how electrons behave without the use of instruments. We can only observe one of the mentioned behaviors, which only provides a partial understanding of the entire function of electrons. Therefore, we?re forced to ask ourselves whether the world we observe is objective or if it is subjectively perceived by humans. Or, an alternative question: can man understand the world only through machines that will allow them to observe natural phenomena? Both questions humble man?s capacity to grasp the world. However, those ideas don?t take into account that many phenomena have been proven by human beings without the use of machines, such as the discovery of gravity. Like all philosophical questions, whether man?s reason and observation alone can understand the universe can be approached from many angles.

Extract:

Fellow citizens?Pardon me, and allow me to ask, why am I called upon to speak here today? What have I, or those I represent, to do with your national independence? Are the great principles of political freedom and of natural justice embodied in that Declaration of Inde Fellow citizens?Pardon me, and allow me to ask, why am Icalled upon to speak here today? What have I, or those I represent, to do with your national independence? Are thegreat principles of political freedom and of natural justiceembodied in that Declaration of Independence, Independenceextended to us? And am I therefore called upon to bring ourhumble offering to the national altar, and to confess the benefits, and express devout gratitude for the blessings,resulting from your independence to us? Would to God, both for your sakes and ours, ours that anaffirmative answer could be truthfully returned to thesequestions! Then would my task be light, and my burden easyand delightful. For who is there so cold that a nation'ssympathy could not warm him? Who so obdurate and dead to the claims of gratitude that would not thankfully acknowledgesuch priceless benefits? Who so stolid and selfish, that wouldnot give his voice to swell the hallelujahs of a nation's jubilee,when the chains of servitude had been torn from his limbs? Iam not that man. In a case like that, the dumb may eloquentlyspeak, and the lame man leap as an hart.But, such is not the state of the case. I say it with a sad senseof the disparity between us. I am not included within the paleof this glorious anniversary. Oh pity! Your high independenceonly reveals the immeasurable distance between us. Theblessings in which you this day rejoice, I do not enjoy incommon. The rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity,and independence, bequeathed by your fathers, is shared byyou, not by me. This Fourth of July is yours, not mine. You mayrejoice, I must mourn. To drag a man in fetters into the grand illuminated temple of liberty, and call upon him to join you injoyous anthems, were inhuman mockery and sacrilegiousirony. Do you mean, citizens, to mock me, by asking me tospeak today? If so there is a parallel to your conduct. And letme warn you that it is dangerous to copy the example of anation whose crimes, towering up to heaven, were throwndown by the breath of the Almighty, burying that nation andirrecoverable ruin! I can today take up the plaintive lament ofa peeled and woe-smitten people. By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down. Yea! We weptwhen we remembered Zion. We hanged our harps upon thewillows in the midst thereof. For there, they that carried usaway captive, required of us a song; and they who wasted usrequired of us mirth, saying, ?Sing us one of the songs ofZion.? How can we sing the Lord's song in a strange land? If Iforget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget hercunning. If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave tothe roof of my mouth.pendence, Independence extended to us? And am I therefore called upon to bring our humble offering to the national altar, and to confess the benefits, and express devout gratitude for the blessings, resulting from your independence to us? Would to God, both for your sakes and ours, ours that an affirmative answer could be truthfully returned to these questions! Then would my task be light, and my burden easy and delightful. For who is there so cold that a nation's sympathy could not warm him? Who so obdurate and dead to the claims of gratitude that would not thankfully acknowledge such priceless benefits? Who so stolid and selfish, that would not give his voice to swell the hallelujahs of a nation's jubilee, when the chains of servitude had been torn from his limbs? I am not that man. In a case like that, the dumb may eloquently speak, and the lame man leap as an hart. But, such is not the state of the case. I say it with a sad sense of the disparity between us. I am not included within the pale of this glorious anniversary. Oh pity! Your high independence only reveals the immeasurable distance between us. The blessings in which you this day rejoice, I do not enjoy in common. The rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity, and independence, bequeathed by your fathers, is shared by you, not by me. This Fourth of July is yours, not mine. You may rejoice, I must mourn. To drag a man in fetters into the grand illuminated temple of liberty, and call upon him to join you in joyous anthems, were inhuman mockery and sacrilegious irony. Do you mean, citizens, to mock me, by asking me to speak today? If so there is a parallel to your conduct. And let me warn you that it is dangerous to copy the example of a nation whose crimes, towering up to heaven, were thrown down by the breath of the Almighty, burying that nation and irrecoverable ruin! I can today take up the plaintive lament of a peeled and woe-smitten people. By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down. Yea! We wept when we remembered Zion. We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof. For there, they that carried us away captive, required of us a song; and they who wasted us required of us mirth, saying, ?Sing us one of the songs of Zion.? How can we sing the Lord's song in a strange land? If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth.

Extract:

Fellow citizens?Pardon me, and allow me to ask, why am I called upon to speak here today? What have I, or those I represent, to do with your national independence? Are the great principles of political freedom and of natural justice embodied in that Declaration of Inde Fellow citizens?Pardon me, and allow me to ask, why am Icalled upon to speak here today? What have I, or those I represent, to do with your national independence? Are thegreat principles of political freedom and of natural justiceembodied in that Declaration of Independence, Independenceextended to us? And am I therefore called upon to bring ourhumble offering to the national altar, and to confess the benefits, and express devout gratitude for the blessings,resulting from your independence to us? Would to God, both for your sakes and ours, ours that anaffirmative answer could be truthfully returned to thesequestions! Then would my task be light, and my burden easyand delightful. For who is there so cold that a nation'ssympathy could not warm him? Who so obdurate and dead to the claims of gratitude that would not thankfully acknowledgesuch priceless benefits? Who so stolid and selfish, that wouldnot give his voice to swell the hallelujahs of a nation's jubilee,when the chains of servitude had been torn from his limbs? Iam not that man. In a case like that, the dumb may eloquentlyspeak, and the lame man leap as an hart.But, such is not the state of the case. I say it with a sad senseof the disparity between us. I am not included within the paleof this glorious anniversary. Oh pity! Your high independenceonly reveals the immeasurable distance between us. Theblessings in which you this day rejoice, I do not enjoy incommon. The rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity,and independence, bequeathed by your fathers, is shared byyou, not by me. This Fourth of July is yours, not mine. You mayrejoice, I must mourn. To drag a man in fetters into the grand illuminated temple of liberty, and call upon him to join you injoyous anthems, were inhuman mockery and sacrilegiousirony. Do you mean, citizens, to mock me, by asking me tospeak today? If so there is a parallel to your conduct. And letme warn you that it is dangerous to copy the example of anation whose crimes, towering up to heaven, were throwndown by the breath of the Almighty, burying that nation andirrecoverable ruin! I can today take up the plaintive lament ofa peeled and woe-smitten people. By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down. Yea! We weptwhen we remembered Zion. We hanged our harps upon thewillows in the midst thereof. For there, they that carried usaway captive, required of us a song; and they who wasted usrequired of us mirth, saying, ?Sing us one of the songs ofZion.? How can we sing the Lord's song in a strange land? If Iforget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget hercunning. If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave tothe roof of my mouth.pendence, Independence extended to us? And am I therefore called upon to bring our humble offering to the national altar, and to confess the benefits, and express devout gratitude for the blessings, resulting from your independence to us? Would to God, both for your sakes and ours, ours that an affirmative answer could be truthfully returned to these questions! Then would my task be light, and my burden easy and delightful. For who is there so cold that a nation's sympathy could not warm him? Who so obdurate and dead to the claims of gratitude that would not thankfully acknowledge such priceless benefits? Who so stolid and selfish, that would not give his voice to swell the hallelujahs of a nation's jubilee, when the chains of servitude had been torn from his limbs? I am not that man. In a case like that, the dumb may eloquently speak, and the lame man leap as an hart. But, such is not the state of the case. I say it with a sad sense of the disparity between us. I am not included within the pale of this glorious anniversary. Oh pity! Your high independence only reveals the immeasurable distance between us. The blessings in which you this day rejoice, I do not enjoy in common. The rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity, and independence, bequeathed by your fathers, is shared by you, not by me. This Fourth of July is yours, not mine. You may rejoice, I must mourn. To drag a man in fetters into the grand illuminated temple of liberty, and call upon him to join you in joyous anthems, were inhuman mockery and sacrilegious irony. Do you mean, citizens, to mock me, by asking me to speak today? If so there is a parallel to your conduct. And let me warn you that it is dangerous to copy the example of a nation whose crimes, towering up to heaven, were thrown down by the breath of the Almighty, burying that nation and irrecoverable ruin! I can today take up the plaintive lament of a peeled and woe-smitten people. By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down. Yea! We wept when we remembered Zion. We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof. For there, they that carried us away captive, required of us a song; and they who wasted us required of us mirth, saying, ?Sing us one of the songs of Zion.? How can we sing the Lord's song in a strange land? If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth.

Extract:

Dana Gioia argues in his article that poetry is dying, now little more than a limited art form confined to academic and college settings. Of course, poetry remains healthy in the academic setting, but the idea of poetry being limited to this academic subculture is a stretch. New technology and social networking alone have contributed to poets and other writers? work being shared across the world. YouTube has emerged to be a major asset to poets, allowing live performances to be streamed to billions of users. Even now, poetry continues to grow and voice topics that are relevant to the culture of our time. Poetry is not in the spotlig Dana Gioia argues in his article that poetry is dying, now littlemore than a limited art form confined to academic andcollege settings. Of course, poetry remains healthy in theacademic setting, but the idea of poetry being limited to thisacademic subculture is a stretch. New technology and socialnetworking alone have contributed to poets and otherwriters? work being shared across the world. YouTube hasemerged to be a major asset to poets, allowing liveperformances to be streamed to billions of users. Even now,poetry continues to grow and voice topics that are relevant tothe culture of our time. Poetry is not in the spotlight as it mayhave been in earlier times, but it?s still a relevant art form thatcontinues to expand in scope and appeal. Furthermore, Gioia?s argument does not account for liveperformances of poetry. Not everyone has taken a poetryclass or enrolled in university?but most everyone is online.The Internet is a perfect launching point to get all creativework out there. An example of this was the performance of Buddy Wakefield?s Hurling Crowbirds at Mockingbars.Wakefield is a well-known poet who has published severalcollections of contemporary poetry. One of my favorite worksby Wakefield is Crowbirds, specifically his performance at NewYork University in 2009. Although his reading was a campusevent, views of his performance online number in thethousands. His poetry attracted people outside of theuniversity setting.Naturally, the poem?s popularity can be attributed both to Wakefield?s performance and the quality of his writing.Crowbirds touches on themes of core human concepts such asfaith, personal loss, and growth. These are not ideas that onlypoets or students of literature understand, but all humanbeings: ?You acted like I was hurling crowbirds at mockingbars / and abandoned me for not making sense. / Evidently, I don?texperience things as rationally as you do? (Wakefield 15-17).Wakefield weaves together a complex description of theperplexed and hurt emotions of the speaker undergoing aseparation from a romantic interest. The line ?You acted like I was hurling crowbirds at mockingbars? conjures up an imageof someone confused, seemingly out of their mind . . . or inthe case of the speaker, passionately trying to grasp at arelationship that is fading. The speaker is looking back andfinding the words that described how he wasn?t making sense.This poem is particularly human and gripping in its message,but the entire effect of the poem is enhanced through thephysical performance.At its core, poetry is about addressing issues/ideas in theworld. Part of this is also addressing the perspectives that areexiguously considered. Although the platform may lookdifferent, poetry continues to have a steady audience due tothe emotional connection the poet shares with the audience.ht as it may have been in earlier times, but it?s still a relevant art form that continues to expand in scope and appeal. Furthermore, Gioia?s argument does not account for live performances of poetry. Not everyone has taken a poetry class or enrolled in university?but most everyone is online. The Internet is a perfect launching point to get all creative work out there. An example of this was the performance of Buddy Wakefield?s Hurling Crowbirds at Mockingbars. Wakefield is a well-known poet who has published several collections of contemporary poetry. One of my favorite works by Wakefield is Crowbirds, specifically his performance at New York University in 2009. Although his reading was a campus event, views of his performance online number in the thousands. His poetry attracted people outside of the university setting. Naturally, the poem?s popularity can be attributed both to Wakefield?s performance and the quality of his writing. Crowbirds touches on themes of core human concepts such as faith, personal loss, and growth. These are not ideas that only poets or students of literature understand, but all human beings: ?You acted like I was hurling crowbirds at mockingbars / and abandoned me for not making sense. / Evidently, I don?t experience things as rationally as you do? (Wakefield 15-17). Wakefield weaves together a complex description of the perplexed and hurt emotions of the speaker undergoing a separation from a romantic interest. The line ?You acted like I was hurling crowbirds at mockingbars? conjures up an image of someone confused, seemingly out of their mind . . . or in the case of the speaker, passionately trying to grasp at a relationship that is fading. The speaker is looking back and finding the words that described how he wasn?t making sense. This poem is particularly human and gripping in its message, but the entire effect of the poem is enhanced through the physical performance. At its core, poetry is about addressing issues/ideas in the world. Part of this is also addressing the perspectives that are exiguously considered. Although the platform may look different, poetry continues to have a steady audience due to the emotional connection the poet shares with the audience.

Extract:

Dana Gioia argues in his article that poetry is dying, now little more than a limited art form confined to academic and college settings. Of course, poetry remains healthy in the academic setting, but the idea of poetry being limited to this academic subculture is a stretch. New technology and social networking alone have contributed to poets and other writers? work being shared across the world. YouTube has emerged to be a major asset to poets, allowing live performances to be streamed to billions of users. Even now, poetry continues to grow and voice topics that are relevant to the culture of our time. Poetry is not in the spotlig Dana Gioia argues in his article that poetry is dying, now littlemore than a limited art form confined to academic andcollege settings. Of course, poetry remains healthy in theacademic setting, but the idea of poetry being limited to thisacademic subculture is a stretch. New technology and socialnetworking alone have contributed to poets and otherwriters? work being shared across the world. YouTube hasemerged to be a major asset to poets, allowing liveperformances to be streamed to billions of users. Even now,poetry continues to grow and voice topics that are relevant tothe culture of our time. Poetry is not in the spotlight as it mayhave been in earlier times, but it?s still a relevant art form thatcontinues to expand in scope and appeal. Furthermore, Gioia?s argument does not account for liveperformances of poetry. Not everyone has taken a poetryclass or enrolled in university?but most everyone is online.The Internet is a perfect launching point to get all creativework out there. An example of this was the performance of Buddy Wakefield?s Hurling Crowbirds at Mockingbars.Wakefield is a well-known poet who has published severalcollections of contemporary poetry. One of my favorite worksby Wakefield is Crowbirds, specifically his performance at NewYork University in 2009. Although his reading was a campusevent, views of his performance online number in thethousands. His poetry attracted people outside of theuniversity setting.Naturally, the poem?s popularity can be attributed both to Wakefield?s performance and the quality of his writing.Crowbirds touches on themes of core human concepts such asfaith, personal loss, and growth. These are not ideas that onlypoets or students of literature understand, but all humanbeings: ?You acted like I was hurling crowbirds at mockingbars / and abandoned me for not making sense. / Evidently, I don?texperience things as rationally as you do? (Wakefield 15-17).Wakefield weaves together a complex description of theperplexed and hurt emotions of the speaker undergoing aseparation from a romantic interest. The line ?You acted like I was hurling crowbirds at mockingbars? conjures up an imageof someone confused, seemingly out of their mind . . . or inthe case of the speaker, passionately trying to grasp at arelationship that is fading. The speaker is looking back andfinding the words that described how he wasn?t making sense.This poem is particularly human and gripping in its message,but the entire effect of the poem is enhanced through thephysical performance.At its core, poetry is about addressing issues/ideas in theworld. Part of this is also addressing the perspectives that areexiguously considered. Although the platform may lookdifferent, poetry continues to have a steady audience due tothe emotional connection the poet shares with the audience.ht as it may have been in earlier times, but it?s still a relevant art form that continues to expand in scope and appeal. Furthermore, Gioia?s argument does not account for live performances of poetry. Not everyone has taken a poetry class or enrolled in university?but most everyone is online. The Internet is a perfect launching point to get all creative work out there. An example of this was the performance of Buddy Wakefield?s Hurling Crowbirds at Mockingbars. Wakefield is a well-known poet who has published several collections of contemporary poetry. One of my favorite works by Wakefield is Crowbirds, specifically his performance at New York University in 2009. Although his reading was a campus event, views of his performance online number in the thousands. His poetry attracted people outside of the university setting. Naturally, the poem?s popularity can be attributed both to Wakefield?s performance and the quality of his writing. Crowbirds touches on themes of core human concepts such as faith, personal loss, and growth. These are not ideas that only poets or students of literature understand, but all human beings: ?You acted like I was hurling crowbirds at mockingbars / and abandoned me for not making sense. / Evidently, I don?t experience things as rationally as you do? (Wakefield 15-17). Wakefield weaves together a complex description of the perplexed and hurt emotions of the speaker undergoing a separation from a romantic interest. The line ?You acted like I was hurling crowbirds at mockingbars? conjures up an image of someone confused, seemingly out of their mind . . . or in the case of the speaker, passionately trying to grasp at a relationship that is fading. The speaker is looking back and finding the words that described how he wasn?t making sense. This poem is particularly human and gripping in its message, but the entire effect of the poem is enhanced through the physical performance. At its core, poetry is about addressing issues/ideas in the world. Part of this is also addressing the perspectives that are exiguously considered. Although the platform may look different, poetry continues to have a steady audience due to the emotional connection the poet shares with the audience.

Extract:

The Middle Ages were a time of great superstition and theological debate. Many beliefs were developed and practiced, while some died out or were listed as heresy. Boethianism is a Medieval theological philosophy that attributes sin to gratification and righteousness with virtue and God?s providence. Boethianism holds that sin, greed, and The Middle Ages were a time of great superstition andtheological debate. Many beliefs were developed andpracticed, while some died out or were listed as heresy.Boethianism is a Medieval theological philosophy thatattributes sin to gratification and righteousness with virtueand God?s providence. Boethianism holds that sin, greed, andcorruption are means to attain temporary pleasure, but thatthey inherently harm the person?s soul as well as otherhuman beings. In The Canterbury Tales, we observe more instances of badactions punished than goodness being rewarded. This wouldappear to be some reflection of Boethianism. In the?Pardoner?s Tale,? all three thieves wind up dead, which is aresult of their desire for wealth. Each wrong doer pays with their life, and they are unable to enjoy the wealth theyworked to steal. Within his tales, Chaucer gives reprieve topeople undergoing struggle, but also interweaves stories ofcontemptible individuals being cosmically punished for theirwickedness. The thieves idolize physical wealth, which leads to their downfall. This same theme and ideological principle ofBoethianism is repeated in the ?Friar?s Tale,? whosesummoner character attempts to gain further wealth bypartnering with a demon. The summoner?s refusal to repentfor his avarice and corruption leads to the demon dragging his soul to Hell. Again, we see the theme of the individual whoputs faith and morality aside in favor for a physical prize. Theresult, of course, is that the summoner loses everything. The examples of the righteous being rewarded tend to appearin a spiritual context within the Canterbury Tales. However,there are a few instances where we see goodness resulting in physical reward. In the Prioress? Tale, we see corporalpunishment for barbarism and a reward for goodness. TheJews are punished for their murder of the child, giving a senseof law and order (though racist) to the plot. While the boydoes die, he is granted a lasting reward by being able to singeven after his death, a miracle that marks that the murderedyouth led a pure life. Here, the miracle represents eternalfavor with God.Again, we see the theological philosophy of Boethianism in Chaucer?s The Canterbury Tales through acts of sin andrighteousness and the consequences that follow. Whenpleasures of the world are sought instead of God?s favor, wesee characters being punished in tragic ways. However, theabsence of worldly lust has its own set of consequences for the characters seeking to obtain God?s favor. corruption are means to attain temporary pleasure, but that they inherently harm the person?s soul as well as other human beings. In The Canterbury Tales, we observe more instances of bad actions punished than goodness being rewarded. This would appear to be some reflection of Boethianism. In the ?Pardoner?s Tale,? all three thieves wind up dead, which is a result of their desire for wealth. Each wrong doer pays with their life, and they are unable to enjoy the wealth they worked to steal. Within his tales, Chaucer gives reprieve to people undergoing struggle, but also interweaves stories of contemptible individuals being cosmically punished for their wickedness. The thieves idolize physical wealth, which leads to their downfall. This same theme and ideological principle of Boethianism is repeated in the ?Friar?s Tale,? whose summoner character attempts to gain further wealth by partnering with a demon. The summoner?s refusal to repent for his avarice and corruption leads to the demon dragging his soul to Hell. Again, we see the theme of the individual who puts faith and morality aside in favor for a physical prize. The result, of course, is that the summoner loses everything. The examples of the righteous being rewarded tend to appear in a spiritual context within the Canterbury Tales. However, there are a few instances where we see goodness resulting in physical reward. In the Prioress? Tale, we see corporal punishment for barbarism and a reward for goodness. The Jews are punished for their murder of the child, giving a sense of law and order (though racist) to the plot. While the boy does die, he is granted a lasting reward by being able to sing even after his death, a miracle that marks that the murdered youth led a pure life. Here, the miracle represents eternal favor with God. Again, we see the theological philosophy of Boethianism in Chaucer?s The Canterbury Tales through acts of sin and righteousness and the consequences that follow. When pleasures of the world are sought instead of God?s favor, we see characters being punished in tragic ways. However, the absence of worldly lust has its own set of consequences for the characters seeking to obtain God?s favor.

Extract:

The Middle Ages were a time of great superstition and theological debate. Many beliefs were developed and practiced, while some died out or were listed as heresy. Boethianism is a Medieval theological philosophy that attributes sin to gratification and righteousness with virtue and God?s providence. Boethianism holds that sin, greed, and The Middle Ages were a time of great superstition andtheological debate. Many beliefs were developed andpracticed, while some died out or were listed as heresy.Boethianism is a Medieval theological philosophy thatattributes sin to gratification and righteousness with virtueand God?s providence. Boethianism holds that sin, greed, andcorruption are means to attain temporary pleasure, but thatthey inherently harm the person?s soul as well as otherhuman beings. In The Canterbury Tales, we observe more instances of badactions punished than goodness being rewarded. This wouldappear to be some reflection of Boethianism. In the?Pardoner?s Tale,? all three thieves wind up dead, which is aresult of their desire for wealth. Each wrong doer pays with their life, and they are unable to enjoy the wealth theyworked to steal. Within his tales, Chaucer gives reprieve topeople undergoing struggle, but also interweaves stories ofcontemptible individuals being cosmically punished for theirwickedness. The thieves idolize physical wealth, which leads to their downfall. This same theme and ideological principle ofBoethianism is repeated in the ?Friar?s Tale,? whosesummoner character attempts to gain further wealth bypartnering with a demon. The summoner?s refusal to repentfor his avarice and corruption leads to the demon dragging his soul to Hell. Again, we see the theme of the individual whoputs faith and morality aside in favor for a physical prize. Theresult, of course, is that the summoner loses everything. The examples of the righteous being rewarded tend to appearin a spiritual context within the Canterbury Tales. However,there are a few instances where we see goodness resulting in physical reward. In the Prioress? Tale, we see corporalpunishment for barbarism and a reward for goodness. TheJews are punished for their murder of the child, giving a senseof law and order (though racist) to the plot. While the boydoes die, he is granted a lasting reward by being able to singeven after his death, a miracle that marks that the murderedyouth led a pure life. Here, the miracle represents eternalfavor with God.Again, we see the theological philosophy of Boethianism in Chaucer?s The Canterbury Tales through acts of sin andrighteousness and the consequences that follow. Whenpleasures of the world are sought instead of God?s favor, wesee characters being punished in tragic ways. However, theabsence of worldly lust has its own set of consequences for the characters seeking to obtain God?s favor. corruption are means to attain temporary pleasure, but that they inherently harm the person?s soul as well as other human beings. In The Canterbury Tales, we observe more instances of bad actions punished than goodness being rewarded. This would appear to be some reflection of Boethianism. In the ?Pardoner?s Tale,? all three thieves wind up dead, which is a result of their desire for wealth. Each wrong doer pays with their life, and they are unable to enjoy the wealth they worked to steal. Within his tales, Chaucer gives reprieve to people undergoing struggle, but also interweaves stories of contemptible individuals being cosmically punished for their wickedness. The thieves idolize physical wealth, which leads to their downfall. This same theme and ideological principle of Boethianism is repeated in the ?Friar?s Tale,? whose summoner character attempts to gain further wealth by partnering with a demon. The summoner?s refusal to repent for his avarice and corruption leads to the demon dragging his soul to Hell. Again, we see the theme of the individual who puts faith and morality aside in favor for a physical prize. The result, of course, is that the summoner loses everything. The examples of the righteous being rewarded tend to appear in a spiritual context within the Canterbury Tales. However, there are a few instances where we see goodness resulting in physical reward. In the Prioress? Tale, we see corporal punishment for barbarism and a reward for goodness. The Jews are punished for their murder of the child, giving a sense of law and order (though racist) to the plot. While the boy does die, he is granted a lasting reward by being able to sing even after his death, a miracle that marks that the murdered youth led a pure life. Here, the miracle represents eternal favor with God. Again, we see the theological philosophy of Boethianism in Chaucer?s The Canterbury Tales through acts of sin and righteousness and the consequences that follow. When pleasures of the world are sought instead of God?s favor, we see characters being punished in tragic ways. However, the absence of worldly lust has its own set of consequences for the characters seeking to obtain God?s favor.

Extract:

My Good Friends,?When I first imparted to the committee of the projected Institute my particular wish that on one of the evenings of my readings here the main body of my audience should be composed of working men and their families, I was animated by two desires; first, by the wish to have the great pleasure of meeting you face to face at this Christmas time, and accompany you myself through one of my little Christmas books; and second, by the wish to have an opportunity of stating publicly in your presence, and in the presence of the committee, my earnest hope that the Institute will, from the beginning, recognise one My Good Friends,?When I first imparted to the committee ofthe projected Institute my particular wish that on one of theevenings of my readings here the main body of my audienceshould be composed of working men and their families, I was animated by two desires; first, by the wish to have the greatpleasure of meeting you face to face at this Christmas time,and accompany you myself through one of my little Christmasbooks; and second, by the wish to have an opportunity ofstating publicly in your presence, and in the presence of thecommittee, my earnest hope that the Institute will, from thebeginning, recognise one great principle?strong in reasonand justice?which I believe to be essential to the very life ofsuch an Institution. It is, that the working man shall, from thefirst unto the last, have a share in the management of anInstitution which is designed for his benefit, and which calls itself by his name. I have no fear here of being misunderstood?of beingsupposed to mean too much in this. If there ever was a timewhen any one class could of itself do much for its own good,and for the welfare of society?which I greatly doubt?thattime is unquestionably past. It is in the fusion of different classes, without confusion; in the bringing together ofemployers and employed; in the creating of a better commonunderstanding among those whose interests are identical,who depend upon each other, who are vitally essential toeach other, and who never can be in unnatural antagonismwithout deplorable results, that one of the chief principles ofa Mechanics? Institution should consist. In this world, a greatdeal of the bitterness among us arises from an imperfectunderstanding of one another. Erect in Birmingham a greatEducational Institution, properly educational; educational of the feelings as well as of the reason; to which all orders ofBirmingham men contribute; in which all orders ofBirmingham men meet; wherein all orders of Birminghammen are faithfully represented?and you will erect a Templeof Concord here which will be a model edifice to the whole ofEngland. Contemplating as I do the existence of the Artisans?Committee, which not long ago considered the establishmentof the Institute so sensibly, and supported it so heartily, Iearnestly entreat the gentlemen?earnest I know in the goodwork, and who are now among us?by all means to avoid the great shortcoming of similar institutions; and in asking theworking man for his confidence, to set him the great exampleand give him theirs in return. You will judge for yourselves if Ipromise too much for the working man, when I say that hewill stand by such an enterprise with the utmost of his patience, his perseverance, sense, and support; that I am surehe will need no charitable aid or condescending patronage;but will readily and cheerfully pay for the advantages which itconfers; that he will prepare himself in individual cases wherehe feels that the adverse circumstances around him haverendered it necessary; in a word, that he will feel hisresponsibility like an honest man, and will most honestly andmanfully discharge it. I now proceed to the pleasant task towhich I assure you I have looked forward for a long time.great principle?strong in reason and justice?which I believe to be essential to the very life of such an Institution. It is, that the working man shall, from the first unto the last, have a share in the management of an Institution which is designed for his benefit, and which calls itself by his name. I have no fear here of being misunderstood?of being supposed to mean too much in this. If there ever was a time when any one class could of itself do much for its own good, and for the welfare of society?which I greatly doubt?that time is unquestionably past. It is in the fusion of different classes, without confusion; in the bringing together of employers and employed; in the creating of a better common understanding among those whose interests are identical, who depend upon each other, who are vitally essential to each other, and who never can be in unnatural antagonism without deplorable results, that one of the chief principles of a Mechanics? Institution should consist. In this world, a great deal of the bitterness among us arises from an imperfect understanding of one another. Erect in Birmingham a great Educational Institution, properly educational; educational of the feelings as well as of the reason; to which all orders of Birmingham men contribute; in which all orders of Birmingham men meet; wherein all orders of Birmingham men are faithfully represented?and you will erect a Temple of Concord here which will be a model edifice to the whole of England. Contemplating as I do the existence of the Artisans? Committee, which not long ago considered the establishment of the Institute so sensibly, and supported it so heartily, I earnestly entreat the gentlemen?earnest I know in the good work, and who are now among us?by all means to avoid the great shortcoming of similar institutions; and in asking the working man for his confidence, to set him the great example and give him theirs in return. You will judge for yourselves if I promise too much for the working man, when I say that he will stand by such an enterprise with the utmost of his patience, his perseverance, sense, and support; that I am sure he will need no charitable aid or condescending patronage; but will readily and cheerfully pay for the advantages which it confers; that he will prepare himself in individual cases where he feels that the adverse circumstances around him have rendered it necessary; in a word, that he will feel his responsibility like an honest man, and will most honestly and manfully discharge it. I now proceed to the pleasant task to which I assure you I have looked forward for a long time.

Extract:

My Good Friends,?When I first imparted to the committee of the projected Institute my particular wish that on one of the evenings of my readings here the main body of my audience should be composed of working men and their families, I was animated by two desires; first, by the wish to have the great pleasure of meeting you face to face at this Christmas time, and accompany you myself through one of my little Christmas books; and second, by the wish to have an opportunity of stating publicly in your presence, and in the presence of the committee, my earnest hope that the Institute will, from the beginning, recognise one My Good Friends,?When I first imparted to the committee ofthe projected Institute my particular wish that on one of theevenings of my readings here the main body of my audienceshould be composed of working men and their families, I was animated by two desires; first, by the wish to have the greatpleasure of meeting you face to face at this Christmas time,and accompany you myself through one of my little Christmasbooks; and second, by the wish to have an opportunity ofstating publicly in your presence, and in the presence of thecommittee, my earnest hope that the Institute will, from thebeginning, recognise one great principle?strong in reasonand justice?which I believe to be essential to the very life ofsuch an Institution. It is, that the working man shall, from thefirst unto the last, have a share in the management of anInstitution which is designed for his benefit, and which calls itself by his name. I have no fear here of being misunderstood?of beingsupposed to mean too much in this. If there ever was a timewhen any one class could of itself do much for its own good,and for the welfare of society?which I greatly doubt?thattime is unquestionably past. It is in the fusion of different classes, without confusion; in the bringing together ofemployers and employed; in the creating of a better commonunderstanding among those whose interests are identical,who depend upon each other, who are vitally essential toeach other, and who never can be in unnatural antagonismwithout deplorable results, that one of the chief principles ofa Mechanics? Institution should consist. In this world, a greatdeal of the bitterness among us arises from an imperfectunderstanding of one another. Erect in Birmingham a greatEducational Institution, properly educational; educational of the feelings as well as of the reason; to which all orders ofBirmingham men contribute; in which all orders ofBirmingham men meet; wherein all orders of Birminghammen are faithfully represented?and you will erect a Templeof Concord here which will be a model edifice to the whole ofEngland. Contemplating as I do the existence of the Artisans?Committee, which not long ago considered the establishmentof the Institute so sensibly, and supported it so heartily, Iearnestly entreat the gentlemen?earnest I know in the goodwork, and who are now among us?by all means to avoid the great shortcoming of similar institutions; and in asking theworking man for his confidence, to set him the great exampleand give him theirs in return. You will judge for yourselves if Ipromise too much for the working man, when I say that hewill stand by such an enterprise with the utmost of his patience, his perseverance, sense, and support; that I am surehe will need no charitable aid or condescending patronage;but will readily and cheerfully pay for the advantages which itconfers; that he will prepare himself in individual cases wherehe feels that the adverse circumstances around him haverendered it necessary; in a word, that he will feel hisresponsibility like an honest man, and will most honestly andmanfully discharge it. I now proceed to the pleasant task towhich I assure you I have looked forward for a long time.great principle?strong in reason and justice?which I believe to be essential to the very life of such an Institution. It is, that the working man shall, from the first unto the last, have a share in the management of an Institution which is designed for his benefit, and which calls itself by his name. I have no fear here of being misunderstood?of being supposed to mean too much in this. If there ever was a time when any one class could of itself do much for its own good, and for the welfare of society?which I greatly doubt?that time is unquestionably past. It is in the fusion of different classes, without confusion; in the bringing together of employers and employed; in the creating of a better common understanding among those whose interests are identical, who depend upon each other, who are vitally essential to each other, and who never can be in unnatural antagonism without deplorable results, that one of the chief principles of a Mechanics? Institution should consist. In this world, a great deal of the bitterness among us arises from an imperfect understanding of one another. Erect in Birmingham a great Educational Institution, properly educational; educational of the feelings as well as of the reason; to which all orders of Birmingham men contribute; in which all orders of Birmingham men meet; wherein all orders of Birmingham men are faithfully represented?and you will erect a Temple of Concord here which will be a model edifice to the whole of England. Contemplating as I do the existence of the Artisans? Committee, which not long ago considered the establishment of the Institute so sensibly, and supported it so heartily, I earnestly entreat the gentlemen?earnest I know in the good work, and who are now among us?by all means to avoid the great shortcoming of similar institutions; and in asking the working man for his confidence, to set him the great example and give him theirs in return. You will judge for yourselves if I promise too much for the working man, when I say that he will stand by such an enterprise with the utmost of his patience, his perseverance, sense, and support; that I am sure he will need no charitable aid or condescending patronage; but will readily and cheerfully pay for the advantages which it confers; that he will prepare himself in individual cases where he feels that the adverse circumstances around him have rendered it necessary; in a word, that he will feel his responsibility like an honest man, and will most honestly and manfully discharge it. I now proceed to the pleasant task to which I assure you I have looked forward for a long time.

Extract:

?MANKIND being originally equals in the order of creation, the equality could only be destroyed by some subsequent c ?MANKIND being originally equals in the order of creation,the equality could only be destroyed by some subsequentcircumstance; the distinctions of rich, and poor, may in a greatmeasure be accounted for, and that without having recourseto the harsh ill sounding names of oppression and avarice.Oppression is often the consequence, but seldom or never themeans of riches; and though avarice will preserve a man frombeing necessitously poor, it generally makes him too timorousto be wealthy. But there is another and greater distinction for which no trulynatural or religious reason can be assigned, and that is, thedistinction of men into KINGS and SUBJECTS. Male and femaleare the distinctions of nature, good and bad the distinctions ofheaven; but how a race of men came into the world soexalted above the rest, and distinguished like some newspecies, is worth enquiring into, and whether they are themeans of happiness or of misery to mankind. In the early ages of the world, according to the scripturechronology, there were no kings; the consequence of whichwas there were no wars; it is the pride of kings which throwmankind into confusion Holland without a king hath enjoyedmore peace for this last century than any of the monarchicalgovernments in Europe. Antiquity favors the same remark; forthe quiet and rural lives of the first patriarchs hath a happysomething in them, which vanishes away when we come to the history of Jewish royalty. Government by kings was first introduced into the world bythe Heathens, from whom the children of Israel copied thecustom. It was the most prosperous invention the Devil everset on foot for the promotion of idolatry. The Heathens paiddivine honors to their deceased kings, and the Christian worldhath improved on the plan by doing the same to their livingones. How impious is the title of sacred majesty applied to aworm, who in the midst of his splendor is crumbling into dust! As the exalting one man so greatly above the rest cannot bejustified on the equal rights of nature, so neither can it bedefended on the authority of scripture; for the will of theAlmighty, as declared by Gideon and the prophet Samuel,expressly disapproves of government by kings. All antimonarchical parts of scripture have been very smoothlyglossed over in monarchical governments, but they undoubtedly merit the attention of countries, which havetheir governments yet to form. "Render unto Caesar thethings which are Caesar's" is the scripture doctrine of courts,yet it is no support of monarchical government, for the Jewsat that time were without a king, and in a state of vassalage to the Romans. Near three thousand years passed away from the Mosaicaccount of the creation, till the Jews under a national delusionrequested a king. Till then their form of government (except inextraordinary cases, where the Almighty interposed) was a kind of republic administered by a judge and the elders of thetribes. Kings they had none, and it was held sinful toacknowledge any being under that title but the Lord of Hosts.And when a man seriously reflects on the idolatrous homagewhich is paid to the persons of Kings, he need not wonder,that the Almighty ever jealous of his honor, should disapproveof a form of government which so impiously invades theprerogative of heaven.ircumstance; the distinctions of rich, and poor, may in a great measure be accounted for, and that without having recourse to the harsh ill sounding names of oppression and avarice. Oppression is often the consequence, but seldom or never the means of riches; and though avarice will preserve a man from being necessitously poor, it generally makes him too timorous to be wealthy. But there is another and greater distinction for which no truly natural or religious reason can be assigned, and that is, the distinction of men into KINGS and SUBJECTS. Male and female are the distinctions of nature, good and bad the distinctions of heaven; but how a race of men came into the world so exalted above the rest, and distinguished like some new species, is worth enquiring into, and whether they are the means of happiness or of misery to mankind. In the early ages of the world, according to the scripture chronology, there were no kings; the consequence of which was there were no wars; it is the pride of kings which throw mankind into confusion Holland without a king hath enjoyed more peace for this last century than any of the monarchical governments in Europe. Antiquity favors the same remark; for the quiet and rural lives of the first patriarchs hath a happy something in them, which vanishes away when we come to the history of Jewish royalty. Government by kings was first introduced into the world by the Heathens, from whom the children of Israel copied the custom. It was the most prosperous invention the Devil ever set on foot for the promotion of idolatry. The Heathens paid divine honors to their deceased kings, and the Christian world hath improved on the plan by doing the same to their living ones. How impious is the title of sacred majesty applied to a worm, who in the midst of his splendor is crumbling into dust! As the exalting one man so greatly above the rest cannot be justified on the equal rights of nature, so neither can it be defended on the authority of scripture; for the will of the Almighty, as declared by Gideon and the prophet Samuel, expressly disapproves of government by kings. All antimonarchical parts of scripture have been very smoothly glossed over in monarchical governments, but they undoubtedly merit the attention of countries, which have their governments yet to form. "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's" is the scripture doctrine of courts, yet it is no support of monarchical government, for the Jews at that time were without a king, and in a state of vassalage to the Romans. Near three thousand years passed away from the Mosaic account of the creation, till the Jews under a national delusion requested a king. Till then their form of government (except in extraordinary cases, where the Almighty interposed) was a kind of republic administered by a judge and the elders of the tribes. Kings they had none, and it was held sinful to acknowledge any being under that title but the Lord of Hosts. And when a man seriously reflects on the idolatrous homage which is paid to the persons of Kings, he need not wonder, that the Almighty ever jealous of his honor, should disapprove of a form of government which so impiously invades the prerogative of heaven.

Extract:

?MANKIND being originally equals in the order of creation, the equality could only be destroyed by some subsequent c ?MANKIND being originally equals in the order of creation,the equality could only be destroyed by some subsequentcircumstance; the distinctions of rich, and poor, may in a greatmeasure be accounted for, and that without having recourseto the harsh ill sounding names of oppression and avarice.Oppression is often the consequence, but seldom or never themeans of riches; and though avarice will preserve a man frombeing necessitously poor, it generally makes him too timorousto be wealthy. But there is another and greater distinction for which no trulynatural or religious reason can be assigned, and that is, thedistinction of men into KINGS and SUBJECTS. Male and femaleare the distinctions of nature, good and bad the distinctions ofheaven; but how a race of men came into the world soexalted above the rest, and distinguished like some newspecies, is worth enquiring into, and whether they are themeans of happiness or of misery to mankind. In the early ages of the world, according to the scripturechronology, there were no kings; the consequence of whichwas there were no wars; it is the pride of kings which throwmankind into confusion Holland without a king hath enjoyedmore peace for this last century than any of the monarchicalgovernments in Europe. Antiquity favors the same remark; forthe quiet and rural lives of the first patriarchs hath a happysomething in them, which vanishes away when we come to the history of Jewish royalty. Government by kings was first introduced into the world bythe Heathens, from whom the children of Israel copied thecustom. It was the most prosperous invention the Devil everset on foot for the promotion of idolatry. The Heathens paiddivine honors to their deceased kings, and the Christian worldhath improved on the plan by doing the same to their livingones. How impious is the title of sacred majesty applied to aworm, who in the midst of his splendor is crumbling into dust! As the exalting one man so greatly above the rest cannot bejustified on the equal rights of nature, so neither can it bedefended on the authority of scripture; for the will of theAlmighty, as declared by Gideon and the prophet Samuel,expressly disapproves of government by kings. All antimonarchical parts of scripture have been very smoothlyglossed over in monarchical governments, but they undoubtedly merit the attention of countries, which havetheir governments yet to form. "Render unto Caesar thethings which are Caesar's" is the scripture doctrine of courts,yet it is no support of monarchical government, for the Jewsat that time were without a king, and in a state of vassalage to the Romans. Near three thousand years passed away from the Mosaicaccount of the creation, till the Jews under a national delusionrequested a king. Till then their form of government (except inextraordinary cases, where the Almighty interposed) was a kind of republic administered by a judge and the elders of thetribes. Kings they had none, and it was held sinful toacknowledge any being under that title but the Lord of Hosts.And when a man seriously reflects on the idolatrous homagewhich is paid to the persons of Kings, he need not wonder,that the Almighty ever jealous of his honor, should disapproveof a form of government which so impiously invades theprerogative of heaven.ircumstance; the distinctions of rich, and poor, may in a great measure be accounted for, and that without having recourse to the harsh ill sounding names of oppression and avarice. Oppression is often the consequence, but seldom or never the means of riches; and though avarice will preserve a man from being necessitously poor, it generally makes him too timorous to be wealthy. But there is another and greater distinction for which no truly natural or religious reason can be assigned, and that is, the distinction of men into KINGS and SUBJECTS. Male and female are the distinctions of nature, good and bad the distinctions of heaven; but how a race of men came into the world so exalted above the rest, and distinguished like some new species, is worth enquiring into, and whether they are the means of happiness or of misery to mankind. In the early ages of the world, according to the scripture chronology, there were no kings; the consequence of which was there were no wars; it is the pride of kings which throw mankind into confusion Holland without a king hath enjoyed more peace for this last century than any of the monarchical governments in Europe. Antiquity favors the same remark; for the quiet and rural lives of the first patriarchs hath a happy something in them, which vanishes away when we come to the history of Jewish royalty. Government by kings was first introduced into the world by the Heathens, from whom the children of Israel copied the custom. It was the most prosperous invention the Devil ever set on foot for the promotion of idolatry. The Heathens paid divine honors to their deceased kings, and the Christian world hath improved on the plan by doing the same to their living ones. How impious is the title of sacred majesty applied to a worm, who in the midst of his splendor is crumbling into dust! As the exalting one man so greatly above the rest cannot be justified on the equal rights of nature, so neither can it be defended on the authority of scripture; for the will of the Almighty, as declared by Gideon and the prophet Samuel, expressly disapproves of government by kings. All antimonarchical parts of scripture have been very smoothly glossed over in monarchical governments, but they undoubtedly merit the attention of countries, which have their governments yet to form. "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's" is the scripture doctrine of courts, yet it is no support of monarchical government, for the Jews at that time were without a king, and in a state of vassalage to the Romans. Near three thousand years passed away from the Mosaic account of the creation, till the Jews under a national delusion requested a king. Till then their form of government (except in extraordinary cases, where the Almighty interposed) was a kind of republic administered by a judge and the elders of the tribes. Kings they had none, and it was held sinful to acknowledge any being under that title but the Lord of Hosts. And when a man seriously reflects on the idolatrous homage which is paid to the persons of Kings, he need not wonder, that the Almighty ever jealous of his honor, should disapprove of a form of government which so impiously invades the prerogative of heaven.

Extract:

When I got on the coach the driver had not taken his seat, and I saw him talking with the landlady. They were evidently talking of me, for every now and then they looked at me, and some of the eople who were sitting on the bench outsideWhen I got on the coach the driver had not taken his seat, and I sawhim talking with the landlady. They were evidently talking of me, forevery now and then they looked at me, and some of the people whowere sitting on the bench outside the door came and listened, andthen looked at me, most of them pityingly. I could hear a lot of wordsoften repeated, queer words, for there were many nationalities inthe crowd; so I quietly got my polyglot dictionary from my bag andlooked them out. I must say they weren?t cheering to me, foramongst them were ?Ordog??Satan, ?pokol??hell, ?stregoica??witch, ?vrolok? and ?vlkoslak??both of which mean the same thing,one being Slovak and the other Servian for something that is eitherwere-wolf or vampire. When we started, the crowd round the inn door, which had by thistime swelled to a considerable size, all made the sign of the cross andpointed two fingers towards me. With some difficulty I got a fellowpassenger to tell me what they meant; he wouldn?t answer at first,but on learning that I was English, he explained that it was a charm orguard against the evil eye. This was not very pleasant for me, juststarting for an unknown place to meet an unknown man; buteveryone seemed so kind-hearted, and so sorrowful, and sosympathetic that I couldn?t but be touched. I shall never forget the last glimpse which I had of the inn-yard and its crowd of picturesquefigures, all crossing themselves, as they stood round the widearchway, with its background of rich foliage of oleander and orange trees in green tubs clustered in the centre of the yard. Then ourdriver cracked his big whip over his four small horses, which ranabreast, and we set off on our journey. I soon lost sight and recollection of ghostly fears in the beauty of thescene as we drove along, although had I known the language, orrather languages, which my fellow-passengers were speaking, I mightnot have been able to throw them off so easily. Before us lay a greensloping land full of forests and woods, with here and there steep hillscrowned with clumps of trees or with farmhouses, the blank gableend to the road. There was everywhere a bewildering mass of fruitblossom?apple, plum, pear, cherry; and as we drove by I could seethe green grass under the trees spangled with the fallen petals. Inand out amongst these green hills of what they call here the ?MittelLand? ran the road, losing itself as it swept round the grassy curve, orwas shut out by the straggling ends of pine woods, which here andthere ran down the hillsides like tongues of flame. The road wasrugged, but still we seemed to fly over it with a feverish haste. Icouldn?t understand then what the haste meant, but the driver wasevidently bent on losing no time in reaching Borgo Prund. the door came and listened, and then looked at me, most of them pityingly. I could hear a lot of words often repeated, queer words, for there were many nationalities in the crowd; so I quietly got my polyglot dictionary from my bag and looked them out. I must say they weren?t cheering to me, for amongst them were ?Ordog??Satan, ?pokol??hell, ?stregoica?? witch, ?vrolok? and ?vlkoslak??both of which mean the same thing, one being Slovak and the other Servian for something that is either were-wolf or vampire. When we started, the crowd round the inn door, which had by this time swelled to a considerable size, all made the sign of the cross and pointed two fingers towards me. With some difficulty I got a fellowpassenger to tell me what they meant; he wouldn?t answer at first, but on learning that I was English, he explained that it was a charm or guard against the evil eye. This was not very pleasant for me, just starting for an unknown place to meet an unknown man; but everyone seemed so kind-hearted, and so sorrowful, and so sympathetic that I couldn?t but be touched. I shall never forget the last glimpse which I had of the inn-yard and its crowd of picturesque figures, all crossing themselves, as they stood round the wide archway, with its background of rich foliage of oleander and orange trees in green tubs clustered in the centre of the yard. Then our driver cracked his big whip over his four small horses, which ran abreast, and we set off on our journey. I soon lost sight and recollection of ghostly fears in the beauty of the scene as we drove along, although had I known the language, or rather languages, which my fellow-passengers were speaking, I might not have been able to throw them off so easily. Before us lay a green sloping land full of forests and woods, with here and there steep hills, crowned with clumps of trees or with farmhouses, the blank gable end to the road. There was everywhere a bewildering mass of fruit blossom?apple, plum, pear, cherry; and as we drove by I could see the green grass under the trees spangled with the fallen petals. In and out amongst these green hills of what they call here the ?Mittel Land? ran the road, losing itself as it swept round the grassy curve, or was shut out by the straggling ends of pine woods, which here and there ran down the hillsides like tongues of flame. The road was rugged, but still we seemed to fly over it with a feverish haste. I couldn?t understand then what the haste meant, but the driver was evidently bent on losing no time in reaching Borgo Prund.

Extract:

When I got on the coach the driver had not taken his seat, and I saw him talking with the landlady. They were evidently talking of me, for every now and then they looked at me, and some of the eople who were sitting on the bench outsideWhen I got on the coach the driver had not taken his seat, and I sawhim talking with the landlady. They were evidently talking of me, forevery now and then they looked at me, and some of the people whowere sitting on the bench outside the door came and listened, andthen looked at me, most of them pityingly. I could hear a lot of wordsoften repeated, queer words, for there were many nationalities inthe crowd; so I quietly got my polyglot dictionary from my bag andlooked them out. I must say they weren?t cheering to me, foramongst them were ?Ordog??Satan, ?pokol??hell, ?stregoica??witch, ?vrolok? and ?vlkoslak??both of which mean the same thing,one being Slovak and the other Servian for something that is eitherwere-wolf or vampire. When we started, the crowd round the inn door, which had by thistime swelled to a considerable size, all made the sign of the cross andpointed two fingers towards me. With some difficulty I got a fellowpassenger to tell me what they meant; he wouldn?t answer at first,but on learning that I was English, he explained that it was a charm orguard against the evil eye. This was not very pleasant for me, juststarting for an unknown place to meet an unknown man; buteveryone seemed so kind-hearted, and so sorrowful, and sosympathetic that I couldn?t but be touched. I shall never forget the last glimpse which I had of the inn-yard and its crowd of picturesquefigures, all crossing themselves, as they stood round the widearchway, with its background of rich foliage of oleander and orange trees in green tubs clustered in the centre of the yard. Then ourdriver cracked his big whip over his four small horses, which ranabreast, and we set off on our journey. I soon lost sight and recollection of ghostly fears in the beauty of thescene as we drove along, although had I known the language, orrather languages, which my fellow-passengers were speaking, I mightnot have been able to throw them off so easily. Before us lay a greensloping land full of forests and woods, with here and there steep hillscrowned with clumps of trees or with farmhouses, the blank gableend to the road. There was everywhere a bewildering mass of fruitblossom?apple, plum, pear, cherry; and as we drove by I could seethe green grass under the trees spangled with the fallen petals. Inand out amongst these green hills of what they call here the ?MittelLand? ran the road, losing itself as it swept round the grassy curve, orwas shut out by the straggling ends of pine woods, which here andthere ran down the hillsides like tongues of flame. The road wasrugged, but still we seemed to fly over it with a feverish haste. Icouldn?t understand then what the haste meant, but the driver wasevidently bent on losing no time in reaching Borgo Prund. the door came and listened, and then looked at me, most of them pityingly. I could hear a lot of words often repeated, queer words, for there were many nationalities in the crowd; so I quietly got my polyglot dictionary from my bag and looked them out. I must say they weren?t cheering to me, for amongst them were ?Ordog??Satan, ?pokol??hell, ?stregoica?? witch, ?vrolok? and ?vlkoslak??both of which mean the same thing, one being Slovak and the other Servian for something that is either were-wolf or vampire. When we started, the crowd round the inn door, which had by this time swelled to a considerable size, all made the sign of the cross and pointed two fingers towards me. With some difficulty I got a fellowpassenger to tell me what they meant; he wouldn?t answer at first, but on learning that I was English, he explained that it was a charm or guard against the evil eye. This was not very pleasant for me, just starting for an unknown place to meet an unknown man; but everyone seemed so kind-hearted, and so sorrowful, and so sympathetic that I couldn?t but be touched. I shall never forget the last glimpse which I had of the inn-yard and its crowd of picturesque figures, all crossing themselves, as they stood round the wide archway, with its background of rich foliage of oleander and orange trees in green tubs clustered in the centre of the yard. Then our driver cracked his big whip over his four small horses, which ran abreast, and we set off on our journey. I soon lost sight and recollection of ghostly fears in the beauty of the scene as we drove along, although had I known the language, or rather languages, which my fellow-passengers were speaking, I might not have been able to throw them off so easily. Before us lay a green sloping land full of forests and woods, with here and there steep hills, crowned with clumps of trees or with farmhouses, the blank gable end to the road. There was everywhere a bewildering mass of fruit blossom?apple, plum, pear, cherry; and as we drove by I could see the green grass under the trees spangled with the fallen petals. In and out amongst these green hills of what they call here the ?Mittel Land? ran the road, losing itself as it swept round the grassy curve, or was shut out by the straggling ends of pine woods, which here and there ran down the hillsides like tongues of flame. The road was rugged, but still we seemed to fly over it with a feverish haste. I couldn?t understand then what the haste meant, but the driver was evidently bent on losing no time in reaching Borgo Prund.

Extract:

I heartily accept the motto, ?that government is best which governs least,? and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe??that government is best which governs not at all,? and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient. The objections which have been brought against a standing army, and they are many and weighty, and deserve to prevail, may also at last be brought against a standing government. The standing army is only an arm of the standing government. The government itself, which is only the mode which the people have chosen to execute their will, is equally liable to be abused and perverted before the people can act through it. Witness the present Mexican war, the work of comparatively a few individuals using the standing government as their tool; for, in the outset, the people would not have consented to this measure. This American government?what is it but a tradition, though a recent one, endeavoring to transmit itself unimpaired to posterity, but each i I heartily accept the motto, ?that government is best which governsleast,? and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly andsystematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also Ibelieve??that government is best which governs not at all,? andwhen men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of governmentwhich they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; butmost governments are usually, and all overnments are sometimes,inexpedient. The objections which have been brought against astanding army, and they are many and weighty, and deserve toprevail, may also at last be brought against a standing government.The standing army is only an arm of the standing government. Thegovernment itself, which is only the mode which the people havechosen to execute their will, is equally liable to be abused andperverted before the people can act through it. Witness the presentMexican war, the work of comparatively a few individuals using thestanding government as their tool; for, in the outset, the peoplewould not have consented to this measure. This American government?what is it but a tradition, though arecent one, endeavoring to transmit itself unimpaired to posterity,but each instant losing some of its integrity? It has not the vitality and force of a single living man; for a single man can bend it to hiswill. It is a sort of wooden gun to the people themselves. But it is notthe less necessary for this; for the people must have some complicated machinery or other, and hear its din, to satisfy that ideaof government which they have. Governments show thus howsuccessfully men can be imposed on, even impose on themselves, for their own advantage. It is excellent, we must all allow. Yet thisgovernment never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by thealacrity with which it got out of its way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate. The characterinherent in the American people has done all that has beenaccomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if thegovernment had not sometimes got in its way. For government is anexpedient by which men would fain succeed in letting one anotheralone; and, as has been said, when it is most expedient, the governedare most let alone by it. Trade and commerce, if they were not madeof india-rubber, would never manage to bounce over the obstacleswhich legislators are continually putting in their way; and, if one were to judge these men wholly by the effects of their actions andnot partly by their intentions, they would deserve to be classed andpunished with those mischievous persons who put obstructions on the railroads. But, to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who callthemselves no-government men, I ask for, not at once nogovernment, but at once a better government. Let every man makeknown what kind of government would command his respect, andthat will be one step toward obtaining it.nstant losing some of its integrity? It has not the vitality and force of a single living man; for a single man can bend it to his will. It is a sort of wooden gun to the people themselves. But it is not the less necessary for this; for the people must have some complicated machinery or other, and hear its din, to satisfy that idea of government which they have. Governments show thus how successfully men can be imposed on, even impose on themselves, for their own advantage. It is excellent, we must all allow. Yet this government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate. The character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the government had not sometimes got in its way. For government is an expedient by which men would fain succeed in letting one another alone; and, as has been said, when it is most expedient, the governed are most let alone by it. Trade and commerce, if they were not made of india-rubber, would never manage to bounce over the obstacles which legislators are continually putting in their way; and, if one were to judge these men wholly by the effects of their actions and not partly by their intentions, they would deserve to be classed and punished with those mischievous persons who put obstructions on the railroads. But, to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who call themselves no-government men, I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government. Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it.

Extract:

I heartily accept the motto, ?that government is best which governs least,? and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe??that government is best which governs not at all,? and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient. The objections which have been brought against a standing army, and they are many and weighty, and deserve to prevail, may also at last be brought against a standing government. The standing army is only an arm of the standing government. The government itself, which is only the mode which the people have chosen to execute their will, is equally liable to be abused and perverted before the people can act through it. Witness the present Mexican war, the work of comparatively a few individuals using the standing government as their tool; for, in the outset, the people would not have consented to this measure. This American government?what is it but a tradition, though a recent one, endeavoring to transmit itself unimpaired to posterity, but each i I heartily accept the motto, ?that government is best which governsleast,? and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly andsystematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also Ibelieve??that government is best which governs not at all,? andwhen men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of governmentwhich they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; butmost governments are usually, and all overnments are sometimes,inexpedient. The objections which have been brought against astanding army, and they are many and weighty, and deserve toprevail, may also at last be brought against a standing government.The standing army is only an arm of the standing government. Thegovernment itself, which is only the mode which the people havechosen to execute their will, is equally liable to be abused andperverted before the people can act through it. Witness the presentMexican war, the work of comparatively a few individuals using thestanding government as their tool; for, in the outset, the peoplewould not have consented to this measure. This American government?what is it but a tradition, though arecent one, endeavoring to transmit itself unimpaired to posterity,but each instant losing some of its integrity? It has not the vitality and force of a single living man; for a single man can bend it to hiswill. It is a sort of wooden gun to the people themselves. But it is notthe less necessary for this; for the people must have some complicated machinery or other, and hear its din, to satisfy that ideaof government which they have. Governments show thus howsuccessfully men can be imposed on, even impose on themselves, for their own advantage. It is excellent, we must all allow. Yet thisgovernment never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by thealacrity with which it got out of its way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate. The characterinherent in the American people has done all that has beenaccomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if thegovernment had not sometimes got in its way. For government is anexpedient by which men would fain succeed in letting one anotheralone; and, as has been said, when it is most expedient, the governedare most let alone by it. Trade and commerce, if they were not madeof india-rubber, would never manage to bounce over the obstacleswhich legislators are continually putting in their way; and, if one were to judge these men wholly by the effects of their actions andnot partly by their intentions, they would deserve to be classed andpunished with those mischievous persons who put obstructions on the railroads. But, to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who callthemselves no-government men, I ask for, not at once nogovernment, but at once a better government. Let every man makeknown what kind of government would command his respect, andthat will be one step toward obtaining it.nstant losing some of its integrity? It has not the vitality and force of a single living man; for a single man can bend it to his will. It is a sort of wooden gun to the people themselves. But it is not the less necessary for this; for the people must have some complicated machinery or other, and hear its din, to satisfy that idea of government which they have. Governments show thus how successfully men can be imposed on, even impose on themselves, for their own advantage. It is excellent, we must all allow. Yet this government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate. The character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the government had not sometimes got in its way. For government is an expedient by which men would fain succeed in letting one another alone; and, as has been said, when it is most expedient, the governed are most let alone by it. Trade and commerce, if they were not made of india-rubber, would never manage to bounce over the obstacles which legislators are continually putting in their way; and, if one were to judge these men wholly by the effects of their actions and not partly by their intentions, they would deserve to be classed and punished with those mischievous persons who put obstructions on the railroads. But, to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who call themselves no-government men, I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government. Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it.