Truth

Zizek on Ideology and the Relationship Between Ideology and “The Real” ` CMNS 410 Professor Rick Gruneau December 13, 2011 Zizek on Ideology and the Relationship Between Ideology and “The Real” Slavoj Zizek is one of the leading theorists on ideology since the 1990’s and his conceptions of the real versus the symbolic versus the imagined are of particular importance when dissecting the question ‘what is ideology? Zizek’s critique of ideology and attempt to unpack it’s inner workings is fascinating, he is a powerful intellectual who aims to expose the ”fake” workings of society. In this paper I will outline Zizek’s definition and approach to the study of ideology, paying particular attention to the relationships he draws between ideology and “the real,” as opposed to “the imagined” and “the symbolic”. Zizek opens the book Mapping Ideology (1994) with the introduction “The Spectre of Ideology”, where he defines and openly criticizes the idea of ideology and its illusory personality.

First he presents us with the idea that ideology is a sort of matrix, “a generative matrix that regulates the relationship between visible and non-visible, imaginable and non-imaginable, as well as changes in that relationship” (italics mine, p. 1). He further explains not everything that seems to be ideological, necessarily is, claiming that unless there is a link to power relations in the social realm he does not consider something to be ideological.

He points out that sometimes what we consider to be ideological in fact is not; but also how at other times, things which we may not perceive to be ideological, actually maintain a very strong ideological orientation. He states that the “starting point of the critique of ideology has to be the full acknowledgment of the fact that it is easily possible to lie in the guise of truth” – ideology that is – and this is an important realization for it ispels a common misconception we have of ideology, especially here in the west that, ideology is about lying or misleading others and society. Instead Zizek posits the idea that the content of a message is not what makes it ideological, but instead it is the “the way this content is related to the subjective position implied by its own process of enunciation” that makes it so (Zizek 1994, p. 8).

In other words, regardless of whether the content (of a message or object or interaction) is true or false, it becomes ideological the moment that content functions to achieve “some relation of social domination” and even more importantly, he adds “in an inherently non-transparent way”, reiterating that often times ideology is in fact of a misleading nature but not necessarily in content (italics mine, p. 8); it is from this standpoint that we can begin to understand and critique the concept of ideology.

It is important to note here, although Zizek stresses the importance of recognizing dynamics of power relations (rather than content) which constitutes ideology, he warns this can also be disadvantageous if it reduces “the cognitive value of the term ‘ideology’ and makes it into a mere expression of social circumstances” (p. 9). Considering this, as Gerofsky (2010) explains, Zizek takes on Hegel’s theory of the triad as a heuristic for further developing the theory of ideology, which is something I will address later in this paper, after we go a little bit deeper in defining ideology.

According to Zezik then, a necessary condition for something to be ideological is that there must be a relation or motivation to power in some way, and it must be done so in a way which is not apparent to the addressees (Zizek, 1994). However this is a rather general and overarching consideration when defining the term ideology and it is important to deconstruct the term even further before we proceed in analyzing its inner workings and effect on society. Zizek states “ideology is a systematically distorted communication: a text in which under the influence of unavowed social interests (of domination, etc. a gap separates its ‘official,’ public meaning from its actual intention – that is to say, “we are dealing with an unreflected tension between the explicit enunciated content of the text and its pragmatic presuppositions” (Zizek, 1994, p. 10). Ideology is a system, he argues, of principles, views, theories “destined to convince us of its ‘truth’, yet actually serving some unavowed particular power interest” (p. 10). An example Zizek presents to illustrate this point is the way media portrayed the conflict and cause of the Bosnian war.

News coverage consisted of innumerable accounts of the histories of not only Yugoslavia but “the entire history of the Balkan’s from medieval times” (p. 5). This incredible amount of information, of the struggles and relations between Bosnia and other countries over decades, if not centuries, gives audiences the impression that they must know and understand all the background information of this issue if they are to have an opinion on it or take sides, again presenting countless hours of information and debate on the issue.

Zizek explains that although this is a sort of inversion of what we normally constitute as ideological messaging, and it is unlike the misrepresentation and incessant demonization of Saddam Hussein which was circulated to give justice to entering into the Iraq war, the Bosnian war ideological messaging that took place is in fact “more cunning,” the over exaggerated and false demonization of Saddam Hussein. ecause “to put it somewhat crudely, the ‘evocation of the complexity of circumstances’ serves to [defer] us from the responsibility to act” (p. 5). He explains that instead of withholding information (as the media most often does), or misrepresenting information (Saddam Hussein), in the case of the Bosnian war the media over saturates audiences with information to the point of immobilizing them to make a decision or take action against the fact that this war is spurred by political, economic and monetary power interests.

Zizek explains the purpose of going into war was portrayed as a need to improve unacceptable human rights conditions in the country, and although human rights conditions may very well be unacceptable in that country, and then improve as a result of the invasion, the true motivations for that war (power, domination, money) were kept hidden. This also illustrates the point made earlier about ideology not necessarily needing to be false in its information, but rather hidden in motive, for the information they presented was by no means false or limited, it was excessive, which proves to be just as debilitating a strategy on the general public.

Zizek’s examples and definitions of ideology discussed above demonstrate the division of ideology from Marx’s false consciousness theory (Gerofsky, 2010), but perhaps one of the most important classifications Zizek makes in the realm of ideology, is its connection to dislocation (dislocating truth from falsity) and how this relates to the idea of “the Real” (Stavrakakis,1997). Coming from the Lacanian theoretical background, the concept of Real versus Symbolic versus Imaginary is an integral part of Zizek’s theory, one which sets him apart from traditional conceptions of ideology.

The question of the Real also cannot be separated from the dislocation and presentation of the truth, so these two must be considered together in asserting the concept of ideology. Zizek’s Real draws attention to a fascinating idea, that there is a difference between what is actually real in our world and what is simply a created real by our social structure and by society (Stavrakakis, 1997). The Real, the true real, is “the part of our world as revealed in our experience, which escapes our attempts to symbolize and represent it in a final way” (1997, p. ). The real is the raw and unstructured experience of what is not yet symbolized or imaged by our social structure, by language, by symbols, and it in fact cannot be symbolized in such a way. Unlike the social reality, the true Real is impossible to represent, explains Stavrakaki of Zizek’s theory, impossible to master or symbolize, whereas the social reality is nothing but symbolism and our desire to categorize any part of our experience into a definition or material conception of some sort.

The real is not only opposed to what is “socially constructed” as real, the symbolic, but also it is even farther removed from the imaginary, which falls farthest away on the spectrum, from true reality. The symbolic comes closer to the Real but there is still a gap and something will always be missing from the symbolic real for language can never be a full representation of the real, the true Real however is always in its place. The symbolic real, however is still of importance to Zizek, for it plays the largest role in our society and is perhaps the integral component to ideology in the most general sense.

The symbolic, although generally in the dimension of lauguage, Lacan (who’s theories Zizek has based his own theories of ideology on) does not describe the symbolic as solely equal to language, because linguistiscs are also present in the realm of the imaginary sphere (Lucaites & Biesecker, 1998). The symbolic rather, is about the relationship to the “Other”, it is about difference and the signifiers which create a symbolic order. For Lacan the symbolic is characterized by the absence of any fixed relations between signifier and signified” (Lucaites & Biesecker, 1998).

Lastly there is the realm of the imaginary, when Lacan discusses this stage he refers to the formation of the ego. Identification is an important part of the imaginary, for “the ego is formed by identifying with the counterpart or specular image” (Lucaites & Biesecker, 1998). The ego, fundamentally narcissistic, is centered on identification with alienation and this alienation is another feature of the imaginary. The imaginary is most fundamentally, however, a constitution of surface appearances, ones which are formed in deception as part of the social order.

Going back to Zizek’s theory on ideology, he suggests that one of the most problematic areas of the concept, is that we as theorists, try to escape from the grip of ideology in order to observe the world from an objective position, however the moment we feel we have managed to take up a position of truth, from which we can condemn the lie of an ideology, we instantly fall back into the grip of ideology again because our understanding of the concept is structured on a binary arrangement, which is constantly playing on this relationship between reality and ideology.

It is such the issue of ideology, that the moment we feel we are in the realm of truth, at last, we are in fact instantly back into the ideological exchange, without recognizing it (Stavrakakis, 1997). Zezik does not offer a solution to this, however he offers a way to counter the problem, and this is where the concept of the Real (vs Symbolic vs Imaginary) comes into play, to help us recognize and step outside the atmosphere of ideology that surrounds us.

Instead of the binary relationship between reality and ideology, now there is a three way relationship. Zizek favours the Real over the other two constructs because he argues, the symbolic, although it is representing “reality” it is in fact where “fiction assumes the guise of truth” (Stavrakakis, p. 3), and the imaginary construct, is of course even farther away from that reality, therefore the Real should be the focus of our understanding.

The Real is the “only non-ideological position available,” and although Zizek does not claim to offer access to the “objective truth of things”, he explains we must begin with assuming the existence of ideology in every aspect of our society, and to take up an actively critical attitude towards it. This Stavrakakis argues is the main goal of Zizek’s theory, to expose the need for constant critique of the ideological realm, especially in a time where our society has proclaimed that ideology is a thing of the past and no longer relevant in today’s world.

Zizek’s theory of ideology is a contemporary one which moves beyond traditional definitions of this concept and is not concerned with the way ideological practices worked in the past and in history, instead he is intrigued with the here and now and argues strongly that the concept of ideology is far from extinct in today’s society – contrary to what many would like to believe. And he explains that rather than discarding the notion completely, what we need to do to understand today’s politics in a completely new way of looking at it and defining what it means to be in ideological space and time.

Those who believe we are past the concept of ideology, he argues, are in an “archeological fantasy” and this is only a sign of the greater ability of ideology to ingrain itself without our recognition. In some of his famous presentations Zizek talks about the ideological meaning ingrained even in the simplest of human object and appliances, ones we don’t even recognize contain an ideological message. His famous example, and one he self critically acknowledges to be some sort of anal fixation which he needs to address, is the example of toilets and how they are constructed in different ideological environments.

In France he explains, toilets are constructed with the hole at the back, so that when used, the excrement falls directly in the hole and disappears; he equates this with France’s extremely liberal ideology – out of sight out of mind. In Germany, the toilets are constructed with the hole at the front, in a way that holds the excrement on a shelf (not in water or instantly disappearing) but rather in a way for the individual to see and observe the specimen for worms and any other diseases; he explains this is indicative of the strongly onservative ideology of Germany, where everything is business and completed as necessary. In the Anglo-Saxon world, specifically in America, he explains toilets are somewhere in between, when used the excrement falls in the water but still remains, it is not completely hidden but also not completely displayed; this shows the median position the Anglo-Saxon society usually takes on, not too extreme in either respect (Zizek presentation, Youtube. com). This rather disgusting but nonetheless interesting observation does an excellent job of portraying his theory on ideology.

First, ideology is very much still at play in our society and should be actively observed and considered (in order to minimize any negative and violent effects it may pertain), and secondly, in order to even be able to recognize the workings of ideology in our everyday lives, we have step outside of our customary reality to which we are so well accustomed to, for this symbolic reality is not the Real, and in taking ourselves out of the imaginary and symbolic which appears to be truth and reality, we can then perhaps attempt to get a true glimpse of what he calls the Real.

References Gerofsky, S. (2010). The impossibility of ‘real-life’ word problems (according to Bakhtin, Lacan, Zizek and Baudrillard). Discourse: Studies In The Cultural Politics Of Education, 31(1), 61-73. doi:10. 1080/01596300903465427 Lucaites, J. , & Biesecker, B. A. (1998). Rhetorical Studies and the ‘New Psychoanalysis: What’s the Real Problem?

Or Framing the Problem of the Real. Quarterly Journal Of Speech, 84(2), 222. Stavrakakis, Y. (1997). Ambiguous ideology and the Lacanian twist. Journal of the Centre for Freudian Analysis and Research, 8, 117-30. Zizek, S. (1994a). The spectre of ideology. In S. Zizek (Ed. ), Mapping ideology (pp. 1-33). London & New York: Verso.

English 4A 16 October, 2011 The Truth behind Lady Macbeth In the play, “Macbeth”, the character that stands out the most is Lady Macbeth. Her role in this story is significant, she is an evil, ruthless, and ambitious person. She is responsible for the murders that her husband commits because she was bloodthirsty for the crown. In fact, she then becomes more eager to get the crown than Macbeth himself and soon realizes that once you commit one violent act, there is almost no way of ever turning back.

An analysis of Lady Macbeth reveals that she is a powerful character who adds complexity and depth to a play about murder, madness, and revenge. Due to her ambition to become queen, Lady Macbeth persuades her husband to murder king Duncan. She accuses Macbeth of being a coward believing that he is not worthy enough to match his acts with hi desires telling him “Art thou afeard to be the same in thine own act and valour as thou art in desire? ”(1. 7. 39-40).

Lady Macbeth is trying to bring out the evil within her husband, she wants to provoke him into doing this terrible deed so that Macbeth will no longer be afraid and shall be devoted to murdering Duncan. She is aware that she has control over her husband which she is using against him. Macbeth does not tolerate being called names by his own wife or by anyone else, he states “I dare do all that may become a man; who dares do more is none”. To him his wife’s opinion is very important and he is determined to prove his manhood.

This shows Lady Macbeth’s manipulative power against Macbeth and how she can use his emotions to gain her personal desires which was the crown. Once her husband has decided to go through with it she then begins to plan out the murder. Careful planning is something Lady Macbeth seems to do very well, she shows this when she is planning Duncan’s death. They both decide that the best time to kill Duncan is when he has fallen asleep, “What cannot you and I perform upon Th’unguarded Duncan? ”(1. 7. 69-70). This shows Lady Macbeth’s intelligence and how she is able to be prepared for such a devious crime.

She acknowledges the fact that Macbeth could get caught so she concocts another plan to blame Duncan’s officers for their murder. “What not put upon his spongy officers, who shall bear the guilt of our great quell? ” (1. 7. 70-71). She is confident that her husband will get away with everything as long as he shows no fear and sticks to plan. Without a doubt she shows her fearlessness and loyalty to his terrible act. Not feeling any remorse, she is able to skillfully let go of guilt and skillfully get rid of evidence.

As Macbeth comes back to her after the deed is complete he is very shaken up and extremely paranoid that someone saw him with the bloody daggers. Lady Macbeth tells him, “These deeds must not be thought after these ways; so it will make us mad” (2. 2. 34). By saying this she believes that you shouldn’t feel guilty about doing evil, you should just get it done and move on because thinking about it will only drive you crazy. Also she thinks when commiting violent acts such as murder make sure to get rid of any evidence that will lead people to believe you are a suspect.

Frustrated and upset that her husband came home bathed in blood and the daggers in his hand she states, “Infirm of purpose! Give me the daggers. ”(2. 2. 52-53). She is extremely disappointed in Macbeth for being so careless and cannot believe that he did not go through the well thought out plan smoothly. In her eyes he is still a coward and does not know how to behave calmy when feeling guilty. Throughout the play her character develops drastically, for example in the beginning of the play she is cruel, evil, and fearless, then soon starts change and become a new person.

At first she would have done anything in her power to get something complete especially if she was sworn to it,in fact she says that she would have killed her own child, “I would, while it was smiling in my face…dashed the brains out. ” (1. 7. 56-58). This signifies the depth her character adds to the story, her remorseless attitude and her evil ways make it interesting and encourages the reader to keep reading so that they can find out exactly what she will do next. Actually, without Lady Macbeth, none of the murders in the play probably would have happened since she is the one responsible for all of them.

Even though Macbeth physically did the crimes, she believes she is more noble and just as strong as any man, “That which hath made them drunk hath made me bold. ” (2. 2. 1). What this means is that the wine that the men drink makes them drunk, however it gives her strength to do evil things. Towards the end of the story she realizes that crime does not pay off and regrets what she has done, however at this point it is too late. After all of the murders and blood that has been shed she begins to feel guilty.

Realizing what she’s done, “Nought’s had, alls spent,…tis safer to be that which we destroy. ”(3. 2. 5-7). Crime brings no happiness so why bother doing it when you gain nothing but pain. The worst part of crime is once it has been done there is no way of taking it back, which is exactly what Lady Macbeth thinks when she says, “What’s done cannot be undone. ”(5. 1. 59-60). It is ironic that she feels regretful because of the fact that she was the one who felt that fear and regret was only for the weak and despised cowards.

This goes to show how much her character has developed and leads to her turning point in the play where she has a breakdown. Her conscience finally gets the best of her and in the last act of the play she has become insane. This scene is the most important because it describes all of the things Lady Macbeth has gone through. She feels responsible for everything and wishes to take it back. At this point she has completely lost her mind, she is speaking in rhymes, “The Thane of Fife had a wife, where is she now? ”(5. 1. 37).

Macduff was the Thane of Fife and she is wondering what has happened to his wife, which shows that she was unaware of how Macbeth slaughtered his family. So much blood has been shed that it makes her sick, “Here’s the smell of blood still: all the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand. ”(5. 1. 44). After all of the pain and agony she has caused and what she has become, Lady Macbeth has had enough. The doctor later tells her husband that she has committed suicide which marks the end of the sad and tragic story of her character.

In conclusion, throughout the most powerful tragedy story of Macbeth we see the development of Lady Macbeth’s character. Seeing her go from evil and fearless to a regretful coward is really eye opening on how significant her role is. It truly shows her complexities and the depth of such a powerful character. That is why this play is one of the greatest and most famous of Shakespeare’s work. Works Cited Shakespeare, William, and Alan Durband. Macbeth Modern Version Side-by-side with Full Original Text. Hove, S. Aust. : Townsend School for the Visually Impaired, 1986. Print.

Associate Level Material Appendix J Reliable Sources Worksheet Locate two sources in the University Library on a topic of your choice. Provide the required information for both sources. Source 1 * Author: Reisch, Michael and Jani, Jayshree S. Date: September 2012 Title: The New Politics of Social Work Practice: Understanding Context to Promote Change. Publication: British Journal of Social Work * Write a 100- to 150-word response to each of the following questions: * Is the source reliable? How do you know?

Yes I feel as if this source was reliable simply because it gave facts as well as the truth. This article tells of what type of social work has been done as well as how affective each method was with people. It tells of all the types that they did to fit people’s needs and what it was that happened with each. This being said, it gives us the clear knowledge that we need to see all the different ways it was handled over the past several decades. The authors not only gave their opinions on the subject but they also gave us the facts that they had received.

Is the information relevant to the topic? Yes the information is relevant to the topic because it did talk about the different types of social work practices that have taken place over the past few decades as well as what the people could do to change what was being done to perform it better as a whole. The article gives you a clear picture of what it is that social work deals with as well as what you need to do to conduct the proper work for the job. I do not think that the article could have been any more relevant to the topic than it was.

Does the information reflect a bias on the author’s part? If so, what is the bias? Yes and no. I do not feel as if the authors were too biased on their writing. However they did tell us a little on how they felt about what was being done. The article was more about the practices of social work over the years and how they can be improved with time. It showed us the bad and the good things that social work brings to the table so I feel that all social work topics should and will have peoples personal opinions somehow tied into the mix.

The information that the authors gave us was a great amount that really showed us what it was that needed to be done and how things should work. Source 2 * Author: Blomquist, Brooke A. and Giuliano, Traci A. Date: June 2012 Title: Do You Love Me, Too? Perceptions of Responses to I Love You. Publication: North American Journal of Psychology. * Write a 100- to 150-word response to each of the following questions: * Is the source reliable? How do you know? Yes, I feel that the source is reliable with what they said.

I know this because the article is all about a study that was taken between men and women to see what they had to say on the matter of one saying I love you and their response if they do not feel the same. The article not only describes in full what the study was about but also there are pictures of the responses to what was said that corresponds to it. This article was in a Journal of works so it would seem to be more reliable than just a letter from someone or a little paper that was made about it. Is the information relevant to the topic?

Yes the information that was given is relevant to the topic because it tells just how people perceive how one feels when being told I love you when they do not feel lit as well. It shows of what people said in the survey as well as why they said what they said. To me, the answers that were given do seem to be reasonable as to what I would expect to be said. Normally when one says I love you it is taken by surprise by the person hearing it and if they are not ready to say it back they are normally more apt to tell them the truth about how they feel; Which is what this article is telling us.

Does the information reflect a bias on the author’s part? If so, what is the bias? No, I do not feel that the authors showed bias in the article. I do not feel as if they did simply because it was more about the survey that was taken rather than their personal thoughts on the matter. They may have put a few points in there on how they felt about the subject but there was not enough to say that they gave too much or that they gave more on how they felt about the I love you, Im not ready scenario that happens to most people. The authors showed the true facts on the cases as well as the majority of truth from both sexes.

This simple yet ingenious quote by Kafka does make one stop and think, is life really that meaningless? How can one concur if life is meaningless or not? Before these questions can be answered, one must ask, what is meaning? Amazingly enough, meaning is something we create ourselves. We attach meaning to everything around us whether it be language, a person, an item, or even a pencil.

Meaning comes from within us, making us the sole contributor to our own existence. Therefore, nothing has meaning unless one was to ttach meaning to it, and to attach meaning to anything proves one has created an identity, and that identity allows one to exist. Mortal life by definition comes to an end whether one likes it or not, and because of this, we are always facing the pressure of extinction. The way we cope with this pressure is by giving meaning to the things we do, the things we love, and all the other things which matters in ones life.

To give ourselves an identity in which we exist in this world and to leave behind a trace of our existence. Although it is truly evident that meaning comes from within the individual, others might think differently. One of the main arguments against meaning coming from the individual is that we were already given meaning since birth, given a set of beliefs and morals to follow, so how does one create meaning if it was already given to us from generation through generation?

What they do not know is that meaning is something we gain through experience, and experience is not something we have from birth. Another valid argument would be that this universe does not need meaning and therefore it is not important to have meaning or create meaning. However, meaning is all around us and whether one likes it or not, we were built to reate meaning in order for us to exist, and for us to be able to create an identity. Before we dive deeper into the topic of how we gain meaning, we first have to question what is meaning?

Clare Carlisle quotes Kierkegaard and explains, “Even though all sorts of things exist, for Kierkegaard the word “existence” has a special meaning when applied to human life. This meaning arises from the fact that we always have a relationship to ourselves. ” (Carlisle, What does it mean to exist? ) To go into more thorough detail, meaning is the stem of everything human. Meaning come rom us because like stated above in the quote by Kierkegaard, we are the only ones can have a relationship to ourselves.

Humans only truly exist through identity, identity is gained through experience, and experience is what use to create meaning. Many other individuals would like to believe that meaning does not come within us, but rather given to us, passed down to us from our past generations. For an example, Annie Druyan, wife of astronomer/philosopher Carl Sagan (1934 – 1996) remembered a conversation her husband had with a young man and it goes, “At the end of it, a young man came up to him and he said: What do you give us in return? Now that you’ve taken everything from us?

What meaning is left, if everything that I’ve been taught since I was a child turns out to be untrue? Carl looked at him and said, ‘Do something meaningtul. ‘ ” (Sagan. ) Without meaning this world would b complete chaos. A person needs to grow up with meaning as a supporting factor, or else their world would become chaotic and by definition, meaningless. The young man in the flashback is a person who struggles with the belief that he grew up with meaning given to him and therefore once he comprehend the truth and reality of it all, there would be no significance left.

Carl Sagan tries to make this young man understand that in truth, meaning is something we can create anytime, anywhere, and anyplace. Sagan’s simple and brief quote ‘Do something meaningful’ gives us hope because it illustrates that meaning does not stem from the beginning of our lives, but something we have to experience and something we have to do in order to gain meaning. Although there are many others out there like the young man depicted in Annie Druyan’s flashback, they would have to know that meaning is not something in which they are given, but is gained through their Journey and understanding of life.

This is significant because it is imperative for ones knowledge to understand that no matter how lost or confused one might be, they could always create their own meaning instead of relying or is biased on the thought that meaning was created for us. If one was to be biased on that thought, their total reliance on the meaning at which was given to them would collapse when they learn the undeniable truth that meaning has always been within their reach. Although meaning is a controversial and conflicting topic to discuss, some might argue that meaning is something we shouldn’t try to understand at all.

Alex Percival as a strong opinion towards meaning and how he believes the universe does not need meaning at all. He states in his own words, “With modern discoveries, we have found that the meaning of life itself is pointless, but we are extremely lucky to be here because the probability that any one of us being in existence is next to 0%. ” (Percival. ) In truth, meaning does matter in this world that we live in. Without meaning we would be lost with no identity, and would have no proof of our own existence.

It is important for humans to make meaning for themselves because we want to exist and therefore we should exist. Meaning is not pointless at all, in fact meaning is apart of ones soul, apart of us. Meaning is a tool we strive and depend on to survive, because without it we would feel worthless and needless to say, useless. Despite the many oppositions against the interpretation of meaning, language is one of the many factors in which humans attach meaning to. One blogger give their thoughts on how meaning relates to language and states, “Language communicates meaning, and the origin of meaning is relationship.

In fact; if we use the idea that “relationship is the origin of meaning” as our lens, it opens up a whole new world eyond the narrow definitions that confine meaning to traditional ideas of language. ” (The Wisdom of Life. ) Language in fact does relate to human relationships. To be able to communicate and articulate our thoughts gives us meaning. Without language, humans would not be able to express their thoughts and empty their minds and this is an important process to meaning because how can one attach or create meaning if they cannot express themselves.

It is crucial to understand that language does not get it’s meaning from others but it is something we attach to it. For n example, as Professor Jacoby has mentioned in class, “A chair does not have meaning unless we give it meaning. The word chair to another person could mean something much more significant or it could mean nothing depending who this person is and what significant attachment they have given to the chair. ” (English 205 Lecture. ) Anyone can give meaning to anything as long as there is a special significance to it.

This is how we gain existence and gain identity. It comes through our experience and how we see things in our own eyes and not through what has already been defined for us. When one speaks about language, often we question what is the significance of many languages in this world. As Noam Chomsky says in We Still Live Here, “A language is not Just words. It’s a culture, a tradition, a unification of a community, a whole history that creates what a community is. It’s all embodied in a language. ” (Chomsky. Language is no longer Just words or different types of languages that people speak around the world, it is what set us apart from others. It is what defines us as a people, it gives us meaning. With many languages around the orld, one could feel lost or troubled because they are afraid they could lose their identity. Although that is definitely not the case, language could preserve ones true identity because with language comes a culture, a tradition, a community, and a whole history. With all these factors combined, one can find their identity and create meaning to their lives in their own ways and form.

To find ones own identity is truly important in terms of existence, and the only way to find ones identity is through finding meaning within themselves. Meaning also attaches itself to forms of exceptionalism, how we interpret and ruly follow this ideal belief is entirely up to the person. In one article by The Globalist, they proclaim, “And Americans can only be exceptional if we are well informed and willing to make hard choices and take risks. Apathy, ignorance and risk aversion are the death sentence of the American experiment. (The Globalist, The Idea of American Exceptionalism. ) This is not only true to Americans, but also other cultures around the world as well. To make one self “exceptional” the person needs to be able to make well informed decisions on their own accord and take risks by the ips of the their own fingers. This connects to meaning because the only way we can make our own decisions and take our own risks is by attaching our own meaning to what all of these things mean. To be exceptional does not necessarily translate to ignorance, it could also mean it is their only form of survival.

To any culture around the world, their identity is found through their culture, history, tradition. They rely on these factors because it is what makes them special, unique, and superior from others. Just like how each of them have their own language, tradition, and beliefs, hey want to preserve this by giving it a name, American Exceptionalism, British Exceptionalism, and Greek Exceptionalism. This way, they have given meaning to these terms which in return protect their identities. As individuals we all have a specific responsibility to be fulfilled once we take our first breaths in this world.

One specific sentence which caught my attention in the article by The Globalist was, “As citizens, we have a sacred duty to conserve government by the active ” not passive ” consent of the governed. ” (The Globalist, The Idea of American Exceptionalism. Even if we are a citizen of American or not, it does not matter, because every human in this Earth has a specific duty, which is to do something meaningful so that can be remembered for what theyVe done. The government is depicted as powertul, and because we see them as powertul, we believe that meaning comes from the government.

The governments rules and laws seem to constrain us, but in reality it’s constrictions is what tests our understanding of what meaning is. For an example, in The Trial, a relatable quote from the conversation between K. and the doorkeeper goes as this, “Everyone strives to reach he Law,” says the man, “so how does it happen that for all these many years no one but myself has ever begged for admit-tance? ” The doorkeeper recognizes that the man has reached his end, and to let his failing senses catch the words roars in his ear: “No one else could ever be admitted here, since this gate was made only for you.

I am now going to shut it. ” (Kafka 256. ) In The Trial, it is Kafka’s intentions to make the court look so powerful, because in this way, K. is forced to look for meaning and search for his own identity instead of trying to search for significant meaning in others. In fact, the court is so powerful that they have already planned everything out for K. K. ‘s future was in their hands and yet he barely even realized this because he was transfixed on trying to get everyone else to help him when the answers was within him.

This message is of vital importance to comprehend, because one must know that no matter how powerful the barrier maybe between the person and their journey to gain meaning is, their duty as a human allows them to conquer those obstacles and face their own challenges. In The Trial it is evident from the very beginning K. ‘s thoughts were always ethered to what others thought about him and his need to find meaning through them instead of himself. Whenever K. spoke, he would always pay close attention to others, as though their opinions and thoughts were crucial to him, ” ‘Intrusive, thoughtless people! ‘ said K. s he turned back into the room. The supervisor may have agreed with him, at least K. thought that was what he saw from the corner of his eye. But it was Just as possible that he had not even been listening as he had his hand pressed firmly down on the table and seemed to be comparing the length of his fingers. ” (Kafka 17. Throughout the Trial, K. is repeatedly focusing on what others think of him, how others does not give him attention, and how others gave him meaning. His mind was constantly affected by the whispers around him and it affected him to the point whereby he was utterly dependent on other people.

Kafka’s mission was to make us understand that K. was trapped in the wrong place the whole time, in someone else’s mind. When a person is trapped in someone else’s thoughts, it would be hard for them to understand how important meaning is if they are constantly looking for meaning in the wrong place. One of the great meanings behind Kafka’s works was to question one specific word, “Meaning. ” In the text, K. ‘s conversation with the Priest demonstrates how Kafka views the word meaning, miou look for too much help from people you don’t know,” said the priest disapprovingly, “and especially from women.

Can you really not see that’s not the help you need? ” (Kafka 252. ) Kafka used K. as a guide to help him search for or make meaning. K. is constantly seeking and depending on others to be able to survive and to exist in this world that the meaning to his life soon became xactly that; his reliance on others became his meaning of survival, to exist. Kafka wants us to know that meaning was not already given to us, but we make meaning. We give meaning to people, things, and everything around us so we can feel special, unique, and most importantly to teel I ike we exist.

Katka also wants us to know that K was looking for meaning in all the wrong places and to learn from K. ‘s mistakes. K. looked for meaning through his reliance on others, when he was supposed to create meaning within himself. To exist, we first have to rely on our own thoughts and our own ideas. This significant because our thoughts and our own ideas is how meaning is created. If we do not create meaning through our own minds, we do not exist according to Kafka, and that is why K. ies (Kafka 271) at the end because he was not able to realize his whole life depended on someone else, and his sense of meaning came from the people around him as well which is what makes one exist. Although, this leads to the quote which was stated in the beginning of the essay, “The meaning of life is that it ends. “-Franz Kafka. No matter how a person tries define meaning or try to apprehend it, life does end. So why is meaning so important? Meaning not only gives us a sense of security and comfort from the chaotic world we live in, but it also serves as a backbone to our identity and our existence.

By us giving meaning to anything and everything, it gives us a sense of comfort knowing that it is significant or in some ways meaningful to us therefore making us feel as though we exist because we gave meaning to something which never had meaning before it came into our lives. To exist, to give meaning, and to gain an identity is all part of what it means to be human. Meaning nowadays is interpreted in many different ways, but one theory seems to tand out more than the rest, and it’s that meaning comes from within each individual and not from an external source.

We use meaning to create ourselves, find our identities, and sustain our existence through our lifetime. In these modern times, the word meaning has been modified to each persons own interpretations of what meaning is. The problem is, would meaning ever be completely defined? Or is it a word that us humans can attach our own meaning to? It is definitely something to think about as we progress further into the world of constant change and start to lose the roots of our identity and even our existence.

Today people seem to be obsessed with their diets. Food is a high priority item on the lifestyle agenda with a marked focus on healthy eating. “You are what you eat,” says Ayurveda, the ancient Indian science of life. Food is a basic human need. We always need to know what we eat because food affects practically all aspects of our life. Nowadays, in the manufacturing age, our society still faces the food problem. This is a problem of quality, not volume. Our producing system is capable of producing more food than we need, but how can we be sure about its quality?

Is it healthy and useful or just fuel for our bodies? In this paper we will try to discover what we exactly eat and why. Really, food can easily become a tool to control society, which seems to be happening now. In our open society we have much more “taboo” questions than ever before. This is especially true when we start talking about food problems. This is a forbidden ground for most of us. Why does it happen? How can it be possible that people usually do not know how their food has been made? There are some enthusiasts who try to find answers. The “FOOD, INC. movie, directed by Robert Kenner, is one of the most famous sources devoted to this problem. This movie tells us how our food industry takes people under control. The papers, provided by professional scientists can show an impartial assessment of the problem discussed. Only studying different sources can help to find the truth. Our online writing services can deliver similar custom essays on any related subject. Professional paper writers working for us are experts in this field, willing to provide qualified help with written assignments and custom essays for our clients. http://studentessayhelp. com/2010/09/23/food

It goes without saying, essay writing is a fascinating process that requires a lot of time and effort. Your task is to pick a winning topic, decide the target audience, and create content that will be interesting to read. Without any doubt, it is reasonable to admit that a successful college essay should be well-structured and grammatically correct. Nevertheless, scholars admit that not less important thing that should be considered during writing is a stylistic aspect. It is a crucial phenomenon that can attract a lot of readers. Nowadays, we can come across different tutorials that teach us the rules of credible style. We do not have an intention to tell you the crucial points related to this issue. Are you ready to find out a new thing that will improve the quality of your work and invoke people to read it? Keep reading the article and learn how to define “hook.”

What is a Hook

Do you know how to make a hook in real life? Perhaps, it sounds funny, but in the case of essay writing you have to do the same – to grab the audience.

There are many definitions to this literary technique. Be calm as we will not annoy you with these boring interpretations. Briefly speaking, the definition of a hook is concise and easy, in particular, this is one or two sentences at the beginning of the introduction. The aim of such device is to grab reader’s attention. It is undeniable that writing hooks is an essential part of the essays of different types and disciplines. The reason for it is obvious: despite the theme, each content needs to be attractive and start unusually. Everybody will agree when the essay tells about complicated physical phenomena it is far more interesting to realize its essence if its style is neat and “friendly.” Moreover, the beginning of such type of writing is a crucial point of its success.

The question related to the procedure of making winning hook is rather controversial. There is a statement that the basic information that is integral to make a good hook is the data about the target audience. We are sure of the opposite. Here is the list of the steps that will help you cope with this task.

1. Identify your audience. Before you start writing the hook sentences and whole essay you should be sure of your audience, their age, and social status. You will agree, the content that is interesting for teenagers will be considered boring for adults. Moreover, you have to predict if the information will be useful for both boys and girls. Another key thing to know is the message that you aim to convey.

2. Think about the purpose of the writing. The hook and thesis should coincide the general aim and theme of the paper. It is a type of forbidden thing to create an attractive hook and then present boring statistic. You have to follow the only style for the hook and rest of the content.

3. Treat seriously to the choice of hook. Do not consider it as the joke or funny story. These two initial sentences have to be interesting but at the same time grammatically correct and well-built. It is not enough to paste anecdote. There is no hesitation that good readers will not pick the essay with “trash” hooks for home reading. Mention this thing.

4. Identify the structure that you need to establish. The length and quantity of the hook sentence depend on the wordage and type of essay. If it is a course or research paper, you have to write two or three sentences in order to make the paragraph logically built. On the other hand, when the essay is short it is not professional to make a long hook that will substitute the whole paragraph. That is why you have to be analytic and evaluate the structure of the paper.

5. Create your hook. This is final and the most significant step. Now you have collected all information that is important for making the best hook. You are armed with data related to the target audience and essence of your future essay. So, do not postpone and try your skills.

Types of Hooks

Different statements and various quotations can serve as the hook sentences. The main rule is that they should be interesting and attract readers’ attention. Another key thing to know is that you should pick such type of hook that will logically enrich the context of the whole paragraph and convey the main plot. We have prepared for you the list of the possible variants that can be the best hooks for your essay.

• The literary quotations. This type of hook will make your paper qualitative and establish your authority as an author. You start with the hook quotes about the book or poem that you are using; undoubtedly, it will make the content fresh and interesting. Moreover, feel free and use words of the author in order to prove that you work with credible sources while writing.

• Quotes from famous people. The statement of famous people will invoke the target audience to keep reading your paper. The quote from an authoritative and influential person can help support evidence.

• Short funny story or anecdote. Do not hesitate and use this type of source. At the first glimpse it sounds unprofessional; remember, if you use a funny story at the beginning it doesn’t mean that your whole writing should be comical. Everybody will agree that exciting beginning will make your paper original and grab readers’ attention.

• The Hook questions. That is a perfect way to create an attractive content. There is no better method to invoke people to read a wordage work than to put the well-constructed question. It goes without saying, audience will be obsessed with a great desire to find out the answer that is why they will read the whole paper. We highly recommend you to create a short and precise question in order to avoid the convoluted situation as everybody should realize its main thought.

• Work out the scene. It can be easily applied in practice. You are required to create a small intro where you give information about the life story of the protagonist. You can also describe the one day when a particular adventure occurred, for instance. In most cases, people respond well to such visual examples.

• The interesting fact or definition. That type of hook tells readers the fact that they might don’t know. Your task is to submit the surprising statement that will be discussed in the essay’s body. Without any doubt, such winning hook will encourage people to read the text and reveal more information about this interesting phenomenon.

• State Your thesis and synthesis. This hook can be considered as the most complicated as you have to use the analytical mind in order to work out a good thesis that will make a bridge from your intro to the main body. Do not write long and complex sentences. Your task is to make up the statement that will be grammatically correct and well-understandable.

• Statistics .Here you can submit tables, diagrams, and other visual profs to your content. These will help readers find out that your information is credible and based on the statistical data.

• Reveal a Common Misconception. This is a unique way to hook the target audience. How does it work? At the beginning of the paragraph, you present a hesitation related to the truth of some phenomenon; it can be the assumptions about the general facts.

Are you sure of the shape of the Earth?

Essay Hook Examples

Enlisting the possible variants of the hooks, we can create a wide range of the examples. The integral aspect of it is an interesting, attractive, and existing message. You can pick such anecdote, in particular, that will grab the readers of different age and social status, for instance: “When I was a young boy, my father worked at a coal mine. For 27 years, he made it his occupation to scrape and claw and grunt his way into the bowels of the earth, searching for fuel. On April 19, 2004, the bowels of the earth clawed back.”

Your hook should be entertaining and instructive at the same time; that is why do not forget to use pace, mystery, and suspense. Your “duty” is to teach readers something new but without annoying facts and boring statements.  “Spain, though hardly a literary juggernaut, translates more books in one year than the entire Arab world has in the past one thousand years.”

Another key thing to know is that when you pose a question, it is significant to be sure of its answer. Do not try to confuse your audience as you can discourage them to keep reading the paper.  “What would you do if you could play God for a day? That’s exactly what the leaders of the tiny island nation of Guam tried to answer.” “Have you ever wondered, whether Anna Karenina still loved Alexei if she hadn’t decided to commit suicide?”

Is There Such A Thing As Absolute Truth? There are two answers for the question, “Is there such a thing as absolute truth? ” The answer could be either yes or no. In my opinion, the answer is yes, because every individual lives his or her life in various experiences. Some people claim to know the absolute truth. Individuals based their truth on experiences and emotions and at times not logically consistent. When force fields such as emotions are present decisions are made then opinions are formed.

For example, politics, I state politics because it never has a common ground. In politics you’re either Democrat or Republican, and both parties feel their plan is the absolute truth. As an American, we have the right to our own opinion but realize that our opinion is not the absolute truth. To make the statement that there is no absolute truth is invalid. Because one plus one does equal two so there is absolute truth which can be proven and understood. Is there such a thing as absolute truth?

Yes, because of human conscience that “duty” within us that tells us that certain things are right and wrong. Therefore, our conscience let us know there is something wrong with pain, hunger, rape and makes us aware that love, peace, and charity are positive things for which we should strive for. In my opinion it so important to understand the concept of absolute truth in all areas of life this includes religion, because consequences exist in life for being wrong.

For instance, a nurse can give a patient the wrong amount of a medication that can kill them; having an investment broker make the wrong monetary decisions can put you and your family in poverty; getting on the wrong bus will take someone where they do not wish to go; and dealing with an cheating spouse can result in the destruction of a family and potentially divorce. There are so many religions in this world that attempt to give their meaning and definition to absolute truth.

Your existence is absolute truth which is simple. Through religion, mankinds seek God, we hope for the future, forgiveness of our sins, peace in the midst of struggle, and answers to our deepest questions. Religion is really proof that mankind is more than just a highly evolved creature. God implanted in man the desire to know him, and God is indeed the Creator, which makes Him the standard for absolute truth, and with His authority that establishes the absolute truth.