Compare and contrast Essay Example for Free

Compare and contrast Essay In this coursework I will be examining 3 different newspaper articles about the famous fight between Frank Bruno and Tim Witherspoon. All 3 articles were published the morning after the fight so none of them would have had the hindsight of what the others had said. The articles are A Brave Bruno Fails from The Star, Bruno left In A Wasteland from The Guardian and Fans Hail Bruno As Title Bid Fails from The Daily Mail. There are 2 different types of newspaper these are tabloid and broadsheet. Broadsheet newspapers have an average reading age of about 14 whereas the average reading age of tabloids is only 7-8. From the 3 newspapers The Daily Mail and The Star are tabloids whereas The Guardian is a Broadsheet. The way the articles start and finish is important. In The Star the first paragraph is a single long sentence. This isnt something you would expect from a tabloid. The Guardian also has one long sentence for the first paragraph. This is something you would expect more from the Guardian, as it is a Broadsheet. The first paragraph in The Daily Mail is split into more than one sentence, something you expect more from a tabloid. The way the 3 articles end is also interesting. The Star ends very complimentary of Frank Bruno. It says how he showed strength and courage, how he had a heart of a lion. It ends on a triumphant note, saying that Bruno has not lost everything. The Guardian ends with some quotes from Frank Witherspoon. He is being a good sportsman, saying how Bruno could come back again if he wanted to. It also says I said those rippling muscles of his were no good. This is probably what Frank Witherspoon said before the fight. Before a fight both the fighters would have been insulting the other persons fighting, trying to psyche themselves up and put down their opponents. This is what Witherspoon was saying before the fight, about Brunos muscles. Now the fight has finished and he has won he is being nice and saying that he didnt mean it. The Guardian also ends on a high note. This is the person that has just beaten Bruno saying that he could come back. This is a good point for all fans of frank Bruno. The Daily Mail finishes by giving details about the end of the fight. It tells us how Frank Brunos manager, Terry Lawless, threw in the towel. This signifies the ends of a boxing fight. This article ends on a slightly negative note. Frank Bruno has lost the fight and the heavyweight title stays in American hands. The general mood in each article is different. The Star article is slightly triumphant. Words like strength and courage are used. There is even a feeling of splendour when majestic words such as conquering and king are used. It is not all happy though, there is a slight sign of sadness, using words like pathos and sadly. The Guardian article is disappointed. It starts being not very nice about Bruno, wondering whether he was ready for the fight. At the end it starts with a glimmer of hope, with Witherspoon saying how Bruno could come back if he wanted. The Daily Mail article has a very hopeful mood. It goes on about how Bruno may have lost the fight but he grew in status and has earned everyones respect. The fans have not turned against him and sang Frankie, we love you. Even after he had lost they still loved him. The article has an encouraging mood, all is not lost. The 3 articles, although they are all about the same event, concentrate on different aspects of it. The Star article concentrates almost entirely on Frank Bruno himself. The first column is all about a conversation taking place between Bruno and his manager. His opponent Witherspoon isnt mentioned until the bottom of the first column. He is given only 1 paragraph out of the first 6. After this he is not mentioned for the rest of the article. It does mention how the heavyweight title remains in American hands as Witherspoon won, but this only mentions the country. That is at the top of the second column and after this the rest of the column is back to Bruno. The Daily Mail gives a very detailed description of the actual fight. There are also a lot of exact figures given. There is a 42,000 crowd paid more than i 2 million. The other articles tend to generalise or guess, The Star calls it the nations, and The Guardian calls it thousands. The majority of the article is taken up by the description of the fight. The amount of detail that goes into the description means you can visualise parts of the fight actually happening. It tells us all about how the snap began to go out of his punches, and how he shook Witherspoon with good punches. The Star has a lot to say about the fans admiration of Frank Bruno. It turns the 42,000 crowd mentioned in The Daily Mail article into the whole of England. It talks about the nations longing to see a Briton crowned king. It makes it all very majestic using words like king, turning the boxing fight into a very important event. The Daily Mail has a lot to say about Brunos fans as well. It mentions the 42,000 crowd. It is also the only newspaper to mention money, when it mentions the i 2 million that fans spent on watching Bruno. It goes on to say how much the fans loved Bruno, They sang Frankie, we love you in a demonstration which came from the heart. The Star has a very good attitude towards Bruno. You can see this from the title where it calls Bruno brave. The article mentions the theme tune from the Muhammad Ali film. The haunting theme tune from The Greatest Story Ever Told. This is like The Star is comparing Bruno to Ali. Ali was one the greatest boxer ever so to compare Bruno to him is a very big compliment. It is also saying that Brunos story is also a great story like Muhammad Alis was. The fact that Tim Witherspoon is only mentioned once in the article tells us that The Star doesnt care about him at all, only about Bruno. They dont care that he won the fight; they believe Bruno is the better. Nearer the end of the article there is a sentence in italics. But dont feel guilty Frank, we told him. This is the paper talking to Frank Bruno. The we is referring to The Star. They are telling him not to feel bad that he lost. It then continues to say how he showed strength courage showed the world one Briton with the heart of a lion. This is very complimentary to Bruno, saying he has the heart of a lion is saying he is extremely brave. In The Star article there is a bit where Brunos own words are included. This makes us feel that we are getting close and personal to Bruno. We are getting to know him better. The Guardian is not as nice about Bruno. It says how the rigidity and stiffness of Brunos boxing contrasted with the swinging street-corner style of the man from Philadelphia. It doesnt think that Bruno was a very good boxer at all; it even prefers Witherspoon a bit. It goes on to say that Brunos fighting proved to be no more than drawing material. They are saying that Bruno wasnt ready for the fight. It is as if all of his fighting has been taught to him from a drawing board in a gym somewhere. None of it comes naturally to him. This is mentioned in another articles as well. In The Daily Mail it says the manufacturing of Bruno was incomplete. The Guardian journalist goes on to give Bruno some advice about the fight. Bruno ought to have produced more sweeping moves across the ring This is what The Guardian journalist thinks Bruno should have done. This is only with hindsight that he is able to give this advice though; Witherspoon has already won the match. The Guardian doesnt really compliment Bruno at all. It does say how he held all the aces when it came to reach. The other time it could be interpreted as a compliment in the first paragraph. It says Bruno was like an intrepid explorer trekking the icy waste. Someone who is an intrepid explorer is very brave and fearless. The icy waste is Tim Witherspoon. It is saying that in his fight against Witherspoon Bruno was very brave. In this extended metaphor it goes on to say, suddenly he slipped into a crevasse. The crevasse is his loss against Witherspoon. The Daily Mail has quite a good attitude towards Bruno. It is a lot better than the attitude from The Guardian. It opens with the sentence The only thing Frank Bruno lost at Wembley in the early hours of yesterday was a fight. This means that he grew in status; even though he lost the fight he has gained a lot of peoples respect. It goes on to say how he grew also in the affection of the fans. All of this means the newspaper thinks he fought well. We can see that the newspaper likes Bruno when it continues to say he gave the last ounces of his heart and guts and showed ability enough to suggest a long way into the fight that he had a real winning chance. They are being very kind about Brunos fighting style. But even though they say these things they also mention how the manufacturing of Bruno was incomplete. So The Daily Mail also thinks that Bruno was not ready for the fight. This is backed up earlier in the article when it says how it was a classic clash of Street Fighter and Gym Fighter. This means that Witherspoon is a natural street fighter but Bruno is not, he has been taught everything in a gym.

The Prince as Foundation of Modern Day Politics :: Machiavelli Prince Essays

The Prince as Foundation of Modern Day Politics In The Prince Niccolo Machiavelli presents a view of governing a state that is drastically different from that of humanists of his time. Machiavelli believes the ruling Prince should be the sole authority determining every aspect of the state and put in effect a policy to serve his best interests. These interests were gaining, maintaining, and expanding his political power. His understanding of human nature was a complete contradiction of what humanists believed and taught. Machiavelli strongly promoted a secular society and felt morality was not necessary but in fact stood in the way of an effectively governed principality. Though in some cases Machiavelli's suggestions seem harsh and immoral one must remember that these views were derived out of concern Italy's unstable political condition. Though humanists of Machiavelli's time believed that an individual had much to offer to the well being of the state, Machiavelli was quick to mock human nature. Humanists believed that "An individual only 'grows to maturity- both intellectually and morally- through participation' in the life of the state." Machiavelli generally distrusted citizens, stating that "...in time of adversity, when the state is in need of it's citizens there are few to be found." Machiavelli further goes on to question the loyalty of the citizens and advises the Prince that "...because me n a wretched creatures who would not keep their word to you, you need keep your word to them." Machiavelli did not feel that a Prince should mistreat the citizens. This suggestion, once again, serves the Prince's best interests. If a prince cannot be both feared and loved, Machiavelli suggests, it would be better for him to be feared buy the citizens within his own principality. He makes the generalization that men are, "...ungrateful, fickle, liars, and deceivers, they shun danger and are greedy for profit; while you treat them well they are yours." He characterizes men as being self centered and not willing to act in the best interest of the state,"[and when the prince] is in danger they turn against [him]." Machiavelli reinforces the prince's need to be feared by stating: â€Å"Men worry less about doing an injury to one who makes himself loved than to one who makes himself feared. The bond of love is one which men, wretched creatures they are, break when it is to their advantage to do so; but fear is strengthened by a dread of punishment which is always effective.

Modern Ethical Theories

Philosophically Egoism theory purports that one’s self is or should be the motivation and reasons of our own actions.   This theory has two variations, descriptive or normative variation and altruism variation.   Altruism variation holds that one should maximize good for all being in the world (Hobbes, 1651).   Altruism is the opposite of egoism. Ethical egoism is a normative theory that revolves around the idea that each individual should do what is entirely in his or her self interests and by doing actions that aimed at self interest he or she achieves morality.   The theory states that one’s self interest is the primary motive of actions and is the moral thing to do. Hence the theory is a self effacing theory which tries to justify reasons for actions as duty bound or morally right. Psychological egoism theory on the other hand is a descriptive theory that describes human actions as wholly motivated by self interest it implies that individual’s actions are purely by self centered even though the actions may seem to be motivated by interest of others (More, G.E., 1903).   It states that, â€Å"all human actions are selfish acts at their roots†. Thus it asserts that if individual helps others, acts which may seem to be of benefit to others.   The primary motive may be the need for an individual to better him/herself thus making the act self-seeking.   It is impossible to empirically prove the psychological egoism theory wrong but it is just as hard to empirically prove the theory right.   In addition once the premise of the theory is accepted the actions can be interpreted to support the theory. Fallacy of Psychological Egoism Psychological egoism theory states that people are always motivated by their own interests.   This   however hastily   generalizes actions and their motivation   since there are instances we can disapprove this such as, when an individual smokes .this is an act that can be harmful to one’s wellbeing thus not act in   self interest, others such as soldiers carry out their duties without considering personal gains. There are also instances where motivations to act may appear to be of no self interest   at face value but   are nevertheless self interest motivated (Rachels, J., 2003).   For example if an individual is motivated to act out of fear or his acts are motivated by fear, he/she may be acting in the interest of self-preservation. On the other hand, these actions/reactions may be driven by the interest of the other individual or threats from this other individual thus his/her action may be classified as an action motivated for other’s interest.   In this case, the individual actions are what she/he is motivated to do, for instance run. The strong and weak versions of Ethical Egoism The ethical egoism can be split into two versions; the strong and the weak versions.   The strong version supports the endorsement of an individual’s own good as the moral thing to do.   Individual actions that are driven by self-interest or self fulfillment arise out of moral judgement while the weak version supports the premise that there are situations where it may be prudent to ignore personal welfare when making moral judgement (Rachels, J., 2003). For instance if a soldier lies on a grenade to save his friends he may act this way to be able to live with himself In other words if he acted otherwise he may live the rest of his life with a guilty conscience .However the strong version might interpret this action as the moral thing to do. Contrast in Motivation Doctrines of the two theories Psychological egoism theory is the empirical doctrine that an individual’s act is a desire for one’s own welfare (Sigmund, F., 1966).   However, these acts usually conceal the determining motives.   This concealment is usually in their self-interest.   The theory results from observation of human behaviour and can only be proved empirically if there are no exceptions.   It makes no claim to how individuals should act for their self-interest.   This premise can be argued to be verifiable but non-moral. On the other hand, the ethical egoism theory is prescriptive doctrine that individuals actions are in self-interest that is for personal welfare thus the personal welfare is the most valuable thing for an individual.   However, the theory does not claim that all individuals seek their own self interest.   It only claims that individuals should seek their own self-interest that is all individual might not seek self-interest (Sigmund, F., 1966).   For the ethical egoism theory to hold or to be proven as a theory its premises must hold for all individuals. Differences between ethical egoism and psychological egoism Psychological egoism is descriptive while the ethical egoism theory is prescriptive, that is, the psychological theory states why individuals act the way they do while the ethical theory suggests the reasons for such.   The other difference is concerned with their motivation doctrines.   In psychological egoism it is human nature to be driven by selfish reasons whereas in the ethical egoism theory selfish acts are the morally right thing to do (More, G.E., 1903).Psychological egoism deals with reality while ethical egoism deals with what reality should be. It   can also be argued that ethical egoism approves of cooperative behaviour   while psychological egoism does not since the theory   believes in achieving maximum welfare though selfish actions . Conclusion Self-interest actions are not always selfish actions in that one can act in such a way as to benefit or for his personal welfare improvement.   Such actions cannot be termed as selfish and this is always seen as acts out of self-interest.   Self-interest acts are not always selfish acts but selfish actions are always out of personal self-interest. For example if an individual’s self interest is to obey the law we can claim the individual is doing this out of self interest, that is, it is in his/her self interest to avoid legal troubles like being jailed.   This can be seen as a selfish act.   But by obeying the law, it can also be argued that he is doing this in the interest of others or out of consideration of others.   In this case, this is not a selfish act.   However, self-interest actions are not always incompatible with the interest of others for example to help others, which is not a self-interest act.   An individual must first help himself inorder to be in a position to help others. Reference G.E. Moore (1903).   In Principia Ethica: Cambridge University Press. Rachels, J. (2003). The Elements of moral philosophy (4th ed). New York: McGraw-Hill. Sigmund, Freud (1966).   The Interpretation of Dreams.   New York: Avon.   

About Ground Beetles, of the Family Carabidae

Turn over a rock or log, and youll see dark, shiny beetles running for cover—ground beetles. This diverse group of predators are among the top 10 beneficial garden insects. Though hidden by day, at night the Carabids hunt and feed on some of our worst garden pests. Description The best way to get to know the ground beetles is to observe some up close. Since most are nocturnal, you can usually find them hiding under boards or stepping stones during the day. Try using a pitfall trap to collect a few, and check for the telltale Carabid characteristics. Most ground beetles are black and shiny, though some display metallic colors. In many Carabids, the elytra are grooved. Look at a ground beetles hind legs, and youll notice the first leg segments (the hips) extend backward  over the first abdominal segment. Threadlike antennae emerge from between the eyes and the jaws of the ground beetle. The pronotum is always wider than the area of the head where the eyes are present. Classification Kingdom: AnimaliaPhylum: ArthropodaClass:  InsectaOrder:  ColeopteraFamily: Carabidae Diet Nearly all ground beetles prey on other invertebrates. Some Carabids are specialized predators, feeding exclusively on one type of prey. A few ground beetles feed on plants or seeds, and others are omnivores. Life Cycle Like all beetles, Carabids undergo complete metamorphosis with four stages of development: egg, larva, pupa, and adult. The entire cycle, from egg to reaching reproductivity, takes a full year in most species. Ground beetles usually lay their eggs on the surface of the soil or cover their eggs with soil. In general, eggs take up to a week to hatch. Larvae go through 2-4 instars before reaching the pupal stage. Ground beetles which breed in the spring typically overwinter as adults. Carabids that breed during the summer months tend to overwinter as larvae, then finish their development to adults in the spring. Special Adaptations and Defenses Many ground beetles employ chemical defense systems to fend off attackers. When handled or threatened, they use abdominal glands to produce pungent odors. Some, like the bombardier beetles, can even make chemical compounds that burn on contact. Range and Distribution Ground beetles live in almost every terrestrial habitat on earth. Worldwide, about 40,000 species in the family Carabidae have been described and named. In North America, the ground beetles number well over 2,000.