Businesses within the Small Business Administration (SBA) 8A Program Research Paper

Businesses within the Small Business Administration (SBA) 8A Program - Research Paper Example The Federal Government of U.S has, since a long time, actively promoted the socio-economic welfare of small businesses. It is for this particular reason that the Small Business Administration (SBA) was founded to ensure that small businesses have the business acumen and resources to survive and grow in the competitive marketplace. Several opportunities have been provided to small businesses, including the securing of no-bid contracts and granting of prime contracts. In recent years, the 8(a) business development program by SBA has gained a lot of attention owing to generous incentives and growth capabilities offered by the SBA for businesses that meet the criteria for this program. The 8A program was introduced by the SBA with the main objective of assisting and facilitating small and disadvantaged businesses so that they can compete in the competitive marketplace. The popular 8(a) Business Development program is specifically targeted towards small businesses that where individuals who are â€Å"socially and economically† disadvantaged own and control at least 51% of such businesses (Koprince, 2012). Accordingly, it helps such entrepreneurs to get accessibility to mainstream business in the American market. Furthermore, it helps harness the aspirations of entrepreneurs by securing government contracts for such businesses to help them grow. The 8(a) program is separated into two stages: the developmental 4 year period and the transitional 5 year period (SBA.gov). The 8(a) program offers several benefits for disadvantaged entrepreneurs. Firstly, the program entails the â€Å"sole-source† no-bid contract which implies that participant businesses shall not have to bid for contracts and shall be the sole providers of the products to be provided under the contractual agreement (SBA.gov). This holds true for contracts under $3.5 million worth of

Business Inteligence Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Business Inteligence - Essay Example Each of the categories requires a unique packaging and presentation. Furthermore, the type of targeted market differs with every category of product or service advertised in each website. Some of these include: Education Education is a two-pronged economical scope. The Cardiff city hopes to become an academic center within the region. To achieve this, the envisioned city must have strategies capable of beating other modern day academic centers such as Liverpool and London. The city must therefore have schools running and education centers from kindergarden to the university. Theses academic institutions will need accreditation by government authorities to check that they meet the standards of quality (Bogomolova, 2011). The website runs the opportunities that the education sector presents to potential investors. The most common investment opportunity in the academic sector is the setting up and management of private academic institutions. To this end, the website targets the currentl y existing universities such as Oxford and Liverpool among others to invest in the establishment of new campuses within the city. The website offers basic contact information on how interested parties conduct the transactions of obtaining land and other resources necessary for such developments. The company welcomes both local and foreign investors, thus the translation into different other languages. Additionally, the website targets potential students. The education sector primarily depends on the availability of students. Attracting students in the region becomes difficult since children school in regions where their parents reside. The company thus runs a number of other websites advertising other diverse investment opportunities with an aim of attracting as much residents into the city. This way, the basic level academic institutions are certain of pupils (Jiaming, 2008). Tertiary and university level are not much perturbed by the locality of parents. This is thus a level oppor tunity and depends on the advertisement potential of the company and the reputation of the subsequent universities that will eventually set up in the region. Visit, Meet, Invest and Shops These four are massive investment opportunities that the Cardiff and company seeks to capitalize in, the thus each have a separate website which are later translated into other three to four different languages depending on the position and locality of the target market. The Cardiff city hopes to become a number one tourist destination in the country and transform the outlook of Wales. This daunting task will require the involvement of different sector players. The company therefore runs the websites displaying the available natural attractions in the region and provides possible facelifts required in and around every one of them. The websites thus targets tycoons in England and around the world for opportunities in the unexploited hospitality industry. In conjunction to the Visit website, the Meet websites offers a platform where interested parties meet and exchange ideas. In such social gatherings, the investors make possible business contracts geared towards the development of the city. Additionally, a chance to gather all the interested participants in the project further kick starts the development project, as most of these people will require boarding facilities while touring the virgin land. Additionally, the

Psychologial Delvelopment on HIV-infected Teen Essay

Psychologial Delvelopment on HIV-infected Teen - Essay Example 274). There are a lot of issues faced by Teenagers according to their temperaments but the few which are common among most of them includes Disclosure, Medical Adherence, Relationships, and Psychological Issues. (Hosek, Harper, Domanico, Page no. 272). Most teenagers contract HIV through Intravenous Drugs, Unsafe Sexual Practices like taking the risks of not wearing condoms, or uncircumcised penises, or engaging in homosexual activities etc. The first issue is about the Issue of disclosure; people tend to keep the information about their condition to themselves cause of the fear how the surroundings or environment is going to react. (Hosek, Harper, Robinson, Page no. 356) The prime fear is not about how they are going to take it, the prime fear is about how they are going to react, whether they’ll just say your sick its your problem, or some people feel proud and say â€Å"I told you so†. Also what matters is the general teenage philosophy of the 21st Century is that â €Å"Needing Someone is a Sign of Weakness† and if they show someone their vulnerable side they might look like a wuss. Another issue is the Issue of Medication, Teenagers doesn’t like to rely on anyone, they don’t like to work in a timetable, they do their tasks as they come along they don’t like to work in a routine, the dilemma here is that HIV cocktail have to be taken in an order, the patient cant miss any scheduled medication, cause it messes with the already compromised Immune system. The issue with a normal teenager as I mentioned above is that they don’t like to rely on anyone, they think of it as something that’s just extending their life and not in an affirmative way and starts living with the faith that they are almost as good as dead. Many other problems came across such if you are at work, it s difficult to take the medications cause of the primal fear of

The Ideal Society Essay Example for Free

The Ideal Society Essay In its altruistic sense, the government acts as an instrument of representation of the people who have formed it and therefore has the responsibility to govern society as an epitome of all wills unified into a single essence. However, a government does not necessarily possess power, since power is mediated or delegated by society itself to a select group of leaders that use such power in order to benefit the community as a whole. Still, in the long run, as society evolves from its crude state where no set of laws and morals govern human condition, the individual learns to commune with the other and learn to harmonize the human condition. From human experience, social laws are formed and these laws become the basis for the formation of a culture. It is through value-ideas and the word culture is in itself a finite segment in which prominent events are included. In a primitive society, man is concerned with the environment and experience around it. From these habits and practices, it becomes a cultural norm that acts as a basis of living. On the other hand, society remains communal in terms of daily activities. These cultural precepts, in the crude sense, act only as guidelines or moral markers for human beings to regulate and base their actions upon. Breaking such norms correspond to specific punishments, depending on the gravity of the crime. These become the basis for the formulation of established laws and norms in society and as it continually evolves into a deeper and larger aspect, more perspectives are taken into account. In a basic precept of society, there are no sets of laws and moral norms to guide human act. Man first establishes a communal society in which everybody benefits from labor produced as a whole. In each communal group, there are no perceptions on race, gender, or color. Rather, the perspective lies on the group itself (tribe). This society lives in harmony with little or no thought in individual freedom. However, as society develops, with the need for private property and division of labor, the human race then adopts institutions of law for the protection of their rights. In addition, man is engaged in frequent competition and also becomes heavily dependent upon fellow men. Their individualistic essence is lost and there is a looming threat on mans freedom. Yet, by abandoning individual claims in order to join together through a generally accepted social agreement or contract, individuals can preserve their individuality and at the same time enjoy their freedom. Individuals submit to the rule of the general will—the collective agreement which protects individuals from being superseded by the will of others and ensures that this agreement is protected and obeyed because the majority becomes the authors of the law. As the progression of history treads on its usual path, it is inevitable for the human race to stratify and improve its prevalent political and social systems in order to adjust with the demands of industrial and scientific progression. Naturally, the evolution of the human race coincides with the development and diversification of ideas and concepts. Society however, remains on its crudest form, even with the presence of new ideas and perspectives. For individuals basic essence of self-need remains the same and as long as individuals remain such, society can never change. Not every aspect of government is perfect but in essence, the idea remains good and noble. However, once these structures are put into context, there are still some gaping holes with regard its structure. The prevalent government forms are as follows: Democracy, Despotism, Anarchy, Monarchy, Theocracy, and among others. A Monarchical government is one of the oldest forms of societal control through the ruling of the noble elite. However, the evidence through history suggests that the monarchy further instigates social class struggle, oppression, and abuse. Theocracy has the same effect though society is controlled by the religious elite. Anarchy is the complete opposite of the government, basing from the simple precept that humans are motivated by selfish desires and thus no form of government can adhere or address the needs of the many. Democracy is probably the closest form of an ideal government in a given society since its main ideals give emphasis on sovereignty and equality and liberalism. Society is organized through a single, governing body that has the supreme authority to uphold and enforce the laws which society has created. This type of government is separated by three powers that have distinctive qualities in terms of authority, scope and power so as to prevent abuse and dereliction of duty. In terms of individual subjectivity, French political philosopher Jean-Jacques Rosseau in his work The Social Contract discusses the natural inclination of man to develop ‘social contracts’ that represent simultaneously the idea of the whole and individual need: â€Å"Each of us puts his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will, and in our corporate capacity, we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole† (Rousseau 2002, p. ). From this premise, societal behaviour naturally acts according to the contribution to the good; that is, the general will acts as the supreme law of the land because of equality it tries to espouse. Like any other government however, we cannot say Democracy is the ideal state of society; rather, it is close to the ideal societal structure because of its advocacies on freedom, equality and liberty. Unlike the authoritarian rules of monarchy, theocracy, plutocracy or any other form of government where authority comes from a single person or single group, these kinds of governments are only applicable to societies in turmoil or chaos. Democracy allows a sense of individual freedom wherein it coincides with the greater good. In order to satisfy the basic human nature of individuality, an ideal government never takes for granted or abuses the individual spirit through constant tyranny and dictatorship. In addition, an ideal government provides stability and organization in a specific society it governs upon; the people itself is the government, and the representatives they elect are servants who fulfil their duties by addressing the needs of the people and country.

The Infallibility of the Bible: Astronomical Errors

The Infallibility of the Bible: Astronomical Errors 03/12/2017 There is overwhelming support for inerrancy from history. The idea that the Bible can contain errors is a relatively new belief. Author and scholar Harold Lindsell stated, Apart from a few exceptions, the church through the ages has consistently believed that the entire Bible is the inerrant or infallible Word of God[1]. You need a transition here The presence of observable and falsifiable[J1] scientific evidence is perhaps the most compelling reason for the conclusion that the Bible is not free from error. Because this evidenc[J2]e clearly yields certain conclusions that are contradicted by direct statements from biblical authors, we can safely say that the Bible is an imperfect book containing flaws of [J3]human origins. Due to the overwhelming amount of scientific errors the book possesses, you [J4]should have great comfort in deciding that there was no divine inspiration or intervention in creation. Furthermore, the vast categories of errors contained in the Bible demonstrate that the mistakes are not confined to a single author or field of study, a realization that should question the foundation and intent of the book as a whole. This paper will focus considerably on the first chapter of Genesis, astronomy, and biology because each of these topics unmistakably contributes to the faux pas of apologetics. THE BEGINNING: Anyone with a decent background in natural science who undertakes an impartial but critical look at the first chapter of Genesis should have no trouble denouncing its claims as a complete lie. At best, the author has offered a poorly constructed allegory for the creation of the universe; at worst, and far more plausible, Genesis 1 is a total fabrication. This section will of course demonstrate why the creation account in the opening chapter fails miserably to be scientifically accurate.[2] Early in the creation, God allegedly separated the waters into two distinct bodies so that land could appear between them. He called the water below seas and the water above sky, which he presumably held aloft by the use of a firmament (Verses 6-10). While the NIV translated this verse using expansion, the Hebrew word utilized by the author is rakia, which the KJV more accurately translated as a solid body.3 Why is the KJV translation more in line with the authors intent? First, its the primary use of the word. Second, it reinforces the aforementioned idea of a sky ocean because a solid protective layer would be required to suspend the water if there truly were an ocean above us as the Bible suggests. Third, it complements the known widespread primitive beliefs. Take the mindset of an ancient Hebrew for a moment by ignoring any contemporary understanding you have of the world. You can glance at the sky above and observe that its the color of water, while, periodically, water falls from above. With no further evidence to consider and no further understanding of this phenomenon, the perfectly logical conclusion would be that theres a mass of water in the sky. If this is true, it certainly follows that a solid body, a firmament, would be necessary to contain this oceanic reservoir. Perhaps windows even open in the firmament to allow rainfall (Genesis 8:2). Although the pursuit of knowledge has proven these outdated beliefs untrue, we are far richer in scientific understanding than our Hebrew predecessors and should not scoff at the author for his proposal. We now know that the sky is blue due to the scattering of a particular wavelength of light passing through the atmosphere at a certain angle, not because theres an ocean in the sky. While we cannot fault the author for believing this ancient hypothesis, we can conclude that his guess on the properties of the sky was incorrect. Already, a critical analysis has demonstrated the Bible to be scientifically inaccurate and undeniably imperfect. God allegedly created the sun and moon on the fourth day of the creation (14-19), but this curious statement creates a plethora of troubles because God had already divided the day into lightness and darkness as his first creation (3-5). How can there be night and day without the sun, the only appreciable source of light for our planet? Again, we must take the probable mindset of the author to understand his position. Look into the sky away from the sun. Its unreasonable to conclude that the earth is bright at its distal boundaries just because the sun is shining, unless you have solid evidence to the contrary, because the light originating from this enormous ball of fire appears to stop very near its edges[3]. Besides, everyone knows that the horizon is luminous well before and well after the sun is in the visible regions of the sky. Thus, theres no solid reason to conclude that the sun has anything to do with creating the illumination, only that it accompanies the somewhat concurren t periods of lightness. In fact, the Bible explicitly states that the sun and moon are merely symbols to divide the day from the night (14). In the biblical world, however, God controlled morning and evening by this mysterious force called light (3-5), an entirely different entity created much earlier than the sun. We now know that the sun is the determining factor between morning and evening, yet the Bible clearly proclaims morning and evening existed prior to the suns creation. In addition to the sun gaffe, the scientifically ignorant author commits the mistake of listing the moon as a light (16). If we were to be rigidly technical about the Bibles claim, this verse is another scientifically erroneous notion because the moon merely reflects illumination from the sun. Isaiah and Ezekiel also make this mistake in their prophecy accounts (30:26 and 32:7, respectively). Again, we often take our modern knowledge about the universe for granted, yet such a gift was completely unforeseeable to the ancient Hebrew. Another problem arises from the sun not appearing until the fourth day when you consider that plants suddenly appeared on the third day (11-13). While its definitely possible, even very likely, for plants to survive without the sun for a single day, many apologists have attempted to rectify the obvious timeline problems in Genesis by altering the meaning of a day. Once they consummate this amendment, theyve created a timeline in which the plants exist without sunlight for however long these days are to them. In most cases, a biblical day must necessarily be no less than a period of millions of years in order to be congruent with scientific data. While the general Hebrew term for day, yom, doesnt necessarily mean a twenty-four hour day, we still understand it to be a short time period based on every contemporaneous instance of its use. Millennia simply do not qualify using this unbiased criterion. Furthermore, the author provides us with the precise definition of yom in every creation instance: morning and evening. Naturally, well revisit these creationary intervals in the upcoming Thousands Or Billions. For now, lets return to the problem of the plants thriving without the suns existence. Most vegetation requires sunlight to undergo photosynthesis, the process of using light energy to convert carbon dioxide and water into nutrients. I wouldnt bet on plant survival much more than a month without the sun. While its true that the biblical creation has this mysterious light existing prior to the arrival of plants, the only thing we can conclude about its existence is the probable lack thereof. The sun, on the other hand, is fully compatible with plant life. Once again, this obtuse blunder can be justified by the limitations of the ancient Hebrews knowledge because he obviously wasnt aware that plants were feeding off sunlight for their survival. As one final minor point on plants for now, God says he has given us every plant for food (29). However, were now aware of plants with qualities poisonous enough that make us avoid physical contact with them. Such disturbingly reckless advice hardly seems to be the kind likely given out by an omniscient deity. God allegedly created the stars on the fourth day (16), but what were they, and what was their purpose? Biblical authors believed that stars were small sources of light contained within the imaginary firmament covering the earth. In other words, they exhibited no divine inspiration, whatsoever, telling them that stars were actually unfathomably enormous gaseous spheres seemingly countless miles away. In short, the authors celestial hypothesis was incorrect on location, number, and size.[4] Verification for the location part of this position is quite easy to demonstrate. After God made the sun, moon, and stars, he set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth 6(17). So along with the sun and moon, the stars are apparently housed in this imaginary physical boundary separating the sky ocean from the open air above earths inhabitants. The Bible also remarkably claims the outdated belief that stars were extremely small in size. After the disclosure of their location in the firmament, and after God tells Abraham several times that his people would be as numerous as the stars (which is also impossible, yet its claimed to have been fulfilled in Hebrews 11:12), the next clear reference to size and position of these celestial bodies is found in the book of Isaiah. Here, the prophet speaks of exalting a throne above the stars of God (14:13). Likewise, Job says, behold the height of the stars, how high they are (22:12). Stars are not high; they are distant. One would expect these two divinely inspired individuals to make this distinction in their records; instead, they boldly demonstrate that they shared the popular yet erroneous belief that God fixed the stars at the skys apex. The book of Psalms states that God tells the number of stars and calls them all by their names (147:4). Thats quite an impressive accomplishment considering scientists estimate that there could be as many as 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 in the known universe. If God truly told anyone how many stars surrounded our planet, the ridiculous firmament belief should have ceased without delay.[5] Daniel speaks of a vision that he had concerning a giant goats horn knocking the stars down to the ground where the goat stamped upon them (Daniel 8:8-9). Passing comment on the vision, we can also be decidedly certain that Daniel believed stars were tiny lights hanging above the earth. Otherwise, how could his monstrous goat stamp upon them? More importantly, how could someone divinely inspired write something so blatantly preposterous? In the New Testament, Matthew and Mark both record Jesus foretelling of an era when the stars shall fall from heaven (24:29 and 13:25, respectively). Jesus, a supposedly perfect human being who was supposedly the only son of a supposedly perfect god, wasnt immune to scientific ignorance either. Revelation was the grandiose vision of John, yet another man who God allegedly inspired, but John also thought that stars were bright objects of insignificant size directly above the earth. In this record of his dream-like hallucination, he claims to see Jesus holding seven stars in his right hand (1:16). While John may have seen what looked like seven stars in Jesus hand, this is not what the text clearly states. The passage unambiguously says Jesus was holding seven stars in his hand. Thus, Johns statement is certainly in error. In addition, John mentions a dream in which the stars of heaven fell unto the earth and compares this event to a fig tree shaking off its leaves (6:13). Furthermore, he describes a great star falling into the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of the waters (8:10). If a star were to fall to our planet as John indicates, it would annihilate the earth upon impact because these bodies are generally hundreds of times larger than our world. Finally , John sees a dragon swing its tail around, consequently knocking a third of the stars in the sky down to the ground (12:4). Theres no need to discuss how enormous such a hypothetical tail would have to be in order to accomplish this impossibility. After all, Revelation was only a vision. On the other hand, we must expect Christians to accept that this man had a unique foreknowledge of humankinds imminent future. In other words, these ridiculously fantastical events must remain futuristic certainties to biblical apologists. At this point, we can safely say that anyone attempting to harmonize the scientifically determined position, size, and number of our celestial neighbors with a literal interpretation of the Bible is veraciously wasting his time. Another embarrassing tale of biblical nonsense is the construction of the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11. According to the bogus legend, everyone on earth spoke the same language when the erection of the tower began. Because the people of earth had a great desire to catch a glimpse of God, they built this supposed tower intending to breach the sky. As God didnt like the possibility of people spotting him, he confused their languages to prevent the architects from understanding one another. Unable to continue construction, everyone with different languages went separate ways. This story is unfeasible for many reasons.[6] The first problem with the incredulous account is the incongruency of the common language theme. We know that many different languages existed centuries before the storys setting around 2500-2000 BCE. Not only that, but another Pentateuch author had said Noahs sons separated according to their own tongues in the previous chapter (Genesis 10). At the very least, we have a major timeline discrepancy in need of an acceptable resolution. Furthermore, the notion that nineteenth century man had the architectural knowledge to build a tower even a mile high is ridiculous. To fathom that a group of ignorant ancient Hebrews could make an equivalent accomplishment is ludicrous. Interestingly, no divine inspiration is available as a possible excuse for the illogical story because God wasnt siding with his people on this occasion! If he didnt wish for the people to see him, he wouldnt have provided the means for them to do so. Of course, the most obvious blunder is Gods supposed fear of us actually reaching him in the sky. To suggest that an omniscient god would destroy a building because he felt he was in danger of humans catching a glimpse of him is an equally ludicrous proposal. The aspects of this story once again go back to the ancient Hebrew belief that God eternally resided on top of a dome covering the earth. Since an omniscient deity would know that the people could not possibly reach him, he would not have stopped the towers construction for the specific reason provided by the Bible. The story cries of a myth.[7] We also have fanciful tales about giants roaming the earth during the Pentateuch era. Theres a lot of room for interpretation here because the exact nature of these mysterious giants is unknown. However, we understand that the Bible has them living both before and after the flood (Genesis 6:4 and Numbers 13:33). Some Christians have argued these giants are the dinosaurs, but this proposed explanation fails to be consistent with the flood caused the dinosaur extinction hypothesis offered by others in the same crowd. While the text is most likely referring to a race of people, archaeologists have found no reliable evidence that these creatures existed. Given the track record of the Bible thus far, its reasonable to conclude that the Genesis giants are, at best, an exaggeration of an otherwise normal species of life. Jesus also commits another scientific blunder when he declares the mustard seed to be the smallest seed of the earth (Mark 4:31). There are, in fact, many seeds smaller than the mustard, such as the South American orchid, but the Hebrews were obviously ignorant of most everything outside of their homeland. Had God presented this bit of information to the author of Mark, it seems unfeasible that the writer would portray Jesus as a man so careless with his diction. This example is clearly another biblical error on the growing accumulation that arises from the same limitation of divinely uninspired perspective. The suggestion that the Bible is lacking a scientific foundation is nothing less than a colossal understatement. The Bible has failed fair, impartial, and universally applicable tests in multiple fields of science. If God truly is the inspiration behind this purportedly divine declaration to the world, he shows absolutely no interest in its understandability or accuracy in astronomy, cosmology, zoology, botany, anthropology, geology, ecology, geography, physiology, and several other disciplines not covered in this chapter. In fact, the Bible handicaps those who use their God-given talents of reason and logic to settle blatant biblical problems. Nothing can be more detrimental to the authenticity of a statement than contradictory phenomena that we readily observe and experience. With no other evidence to consider, these natural manifestations should always override what we might hope and think to be correct explanations for unignorable discrepancies. Such is the power of science and r eason. They are the impartial pursuit of an answer to a question, not the search for supplements to a predetermined answer. These are just a few examples of how it is useless and counterproductive even for fundamentalists to try to extract concepts from the Bible that they do not have as well as try to argue that they possess any technical and scientific knowledge beyond their time. The Bible is a religious, spiritual, moral and mythological book, and as such is subordinate to the world view of its time and place. It is perfectly possible for Christians to be at peace with their religion and their holy book even though they are aware of their primitive conceptions of the Universe and the World, even as Frei Betto would say in his text The Bible in 12 Steps: Just as no one fails to take a remedy because there is an error of agreement in the bull, Jews and Christians do not care if they find a historical misconception in the biblical texts, and in their eyes they are, rather, religious texts. There are notions of science or history and they know that the biblical authors did not intend to reach methodological and scientific precision.We interweaved religious, historical and scientific references according to the knowledge of the time.While the quality of the wiring, the electronic conduits, the post or the lamp , For who seeks light to see better? FREI BETTO The Bible in 12 Steps That is, a fable does not have its essential content invalidated by the fact of describing fantastic things, like Talking Foxes. In the same way, a myth should not be devalued by its physically absurd elements. If I do not believe in the divine inspiration of the Bible, it is rather by many other factors, such as those quoted in Is the Divinely Inspired Bible ?, yet it does not invalidate its cultural value. The biblical apologists are even lucky that, thanks to the early Catholic Church, only the 3 synoptic gospels and the gospel of John were considered canonical. What in themselves already present myriads of errors conception about nature. Otherwise, it might be utterly impossible not to see Biblical Geocentrism, which although present is not so explicit. In Hebrews 11, the apostle Paul refers to the translation of Enoch, the father of Methuselah, which is not described in the Old Testament, only vaguely suggested in Genesis 5:22. Pauls knowledge certainly came also from other gospels, such as the apocryphon Enochs Book of Secrets, which tells the story mentioned by Paul, which makes this book a little more trustworthy than the other apocryphal even Because it is most probably from him that Paul also removed the mention of the angelic hierarchy of Thrones, Dominions, Principalities and Powers, as quoted in Colossians [1:17], and in other excerpts from his New Testament epistles. Well, this book, written at the same time as the other Gospels by some scholar who knew Aristotelian Geocentrism, explicitly describes the mechanisms used by angels to move the Sun around the Earth, in addition to the other celestial spheres Of the trio Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler, were accepted by most scholars, and yet were far more advanced than the primitive idea of a Flat Earth lost in an Abyss. Probably the incompatibility of Hellenistic geocentrism, which already knew the sphericity of the Earth, with the much more primitive concepts of the Bible, was one of the factors for the disqualification of the apocryphal book of Enoch. It is certainly lucky. For fundamentalists already have a tremendous work to hide and omit blatant biblical naivety about the reality of nature, and to distort and decontextualize verses. Turning the affirmation of the apologists: Many errors were indeed stated, but conservative biblical scholars have always been able to find solutions to these problems. Perhaps they have forgotten to say that these solutions only satisfy even the counselors who have solved their rationality within Religious Fanaticism. [1] Zondervan, (The Battle for the Bible, 1978) [2] Long, Jason (Biblical Nonsense, 2015) 3 Ibid [3] William Henry Burr (Self-Contradictions of the Bible, 2016) [4] C. Dennis Mckinsey (The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy, 1995) 6 Ibid [5] Long, Jason (Biblical Nonsense, 2015) [6] Bart D. Ehrman (Gods Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important QuestionWhy We Suffer, 2009) [7] Bart D. Ehrman (Gods Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important QuestionWhy We Suffer, 2009) [J1]Word is not used in the right context. [J2]Which evidence? [J3]about [J4]one

Watteaus Fêtes Galantes: Style and Meaning

Watteaus FÃ ªtes Galantes: Style and Meaning Discuss the content and the possible meanings of Watteaus FÃ ªtes Galantes The FÃ ªtes Galantes is derived from a genre of paintings produced in the eighteenth century, depicting aristocratic scenes of mirth and merriment set in the mythical world of Arcadia, where humanity and nature live together in harmony. The reasons behind this deliberate juxtaposition of both the aristocratic everyday and setting it in the mythical world was twofold. First, Antoine Watteau, the chief designer of the genre, wished for his paintings to be recognised by the government appointed Academic Des Beaux Arts, who still ranked scenes of the everyday in a lower class than those depicting biblical, historical or mythological scenes with an educational theme. Secondly, the economics behind painting and commissions were changing. In Watteaus economic world, instead of commissions coming almost exclusively from either the crown or the church, as it did previously, private patrons were also commissioning works, and provided most of the revenue for artists. But they also, whether by accident or deliberately, provoke a whole series of other responses, notable insofar as they are representative of nothing, and exist purely as decorative pieces of art. Indeed the reaction at the time was to place Watteau in a category of his own, as the ambiguity of his representations tended to eschew easy categorization. David R. Marshall suggests that: Watteaus paintings were difficult for contemporaries to classify; today they can be understood in terms of spectators response to the semantic vacuum that they present.[1] So, the genre of FÃ ªtes Galantes tends to subvert traditional ways of reading, introducing ambiguity on the level, insofar that the image takes precedence over what exactly is represented. In a sense the FÃ ªtes Galantes was designed to be ambiguous. Thus, the Fete Galante, especially Watteaus work, becomes extremely difficult to read in a straightforward manner; arguably, his work could be laced with irony, his landscapes invoke an almost impressionist free dom, and his concern with the image over the message signalled that his work reveals meanings that perhaps were intentional, or else purely coincidental and decorative. FÃ ªtes Galantes (1717), is a perfect representation of the style that came to be named after the painting. In the scene, a collection of characters are assembled around a statue of an angel. The background of the image invokes impressionist works, insofar as the trees and the composition of the image seems more in tune with the way light works, rather than the simple telling of a biblical or historical tale, as was the nature of previous work. Indeed, the ambiguity of this work is exactly what makes it compelling. Julie Anne Plax suggests that: Watteau consistently applied coherent strategies of representation aimed at subverting high art.[2] Indeed, this particular piece certainly suggests a deliberate eschewing of the concepts of high art for instance, the statue is a plain, generic statue, depicting an angel. Instead of elevating the divine in the picture, Watteau reduces it to the level of the mundane, as a rather dour looking statue in the corner of the composition. Instead o f this divine element, our eye is drawn to the centre of the piece, where some aristocrats talk and lounge in the sun. The resultant effect is a displacement of our expectations, as the scene of the everyday takes precedence over the historical and mythical connotations of the surroundings. Conversation was an important facet to life for Watteau, and indeed, the congregation of people that appear in FÃ ªtes Galantes certainly encapsulates this theme that remains prevalent in his work. Watteau sought to capture the rhythms of conversation, and indeed, the ambiguity of the piece, and the way it juxtaposes the divine, the everyday, the mythical and the traditional gives the impression that the piece is stuck in a dialogue with itself over what it is supposed to be representing. The conversational theme is prevalent in all of the FÃ ªtes galantes, and it is precisely this, juxtaposition of the high-brow conceptual and representational framework, pasted over the ordinary activities of a few aristocrats that makes the work, in a subtle way, revolutionary. Michalski suggests that: Almost all FÃ ªtes galantes should be interpreted from the viewpoint of the conversational theme. Watteau [] accepted the high status of conversation within society, and he paid homage to it thoug h his artful construction of discursive situations and though the discreet but self-revealing conduct of his figures[3]. Indeed, this glorification of conversation instead of the high historical concepts of modern art could be seen in a number of ways first, as a cynical drive to make money from two differing audiences; first, to satisfy the needs of the Academie and maintain an audience, and second, to actually satirize the concept of high art by smuggling the mundaneness of the everyday into a grand, historical painting. Thus, the work can be seen as an ingenious way of making profit from two increasingly disparate groups of people, or else it could be read as a more subversive work of art seeking to destroy the sanctity of representative art from within. This ambiguity and decorousness of the art is precisely what makes the work both fascinating and prescient to an audience that would later treat a work of art as a means to represent the artists unique vision, rather than a self less depiction of biblical or narrative events. Therefore, the work could be read as anticipating the impressionists and modernist art. Indeed, this is one particular reading of the piece. The decorative aspects of FÃ ªtes Galantes certainly can be read as a prototype for the modernist art obsessed by surface representation and secularism that was to come. Overall, the genre of the FÃ ªtes Galantes was important insofar as, despite its position as a distinctly commercial genre, artists such as Watteau, arguably satirized the academy by introducing the authority of the artist into these works. Juxtaposing the everyday with the mythical setting of Arcadia, Watteau appealed to both the French Royal establishment, and also the private aristocratic patrons that wished to see themselves in paint, conversing and doing everyday things in the countryside. Thus, the piece itself exists as a decorative piece, unencumbered by the traditional trappings of biblical narrative and / or morally stimulating works from mythology or history. And, by pushing to the forefront the purely decorative, in many ways secularising high art, Watteau brought to the forefront notions about the relationship between the artist and his art, as well as being a forerunner for movements such as Impressionism and Modernism, that would revolutionize the relationship between artist and art, and also mutate the representational powers of painting from an objective depiction, to an obsession with the various forms and the subtleties of seeing objects differently. Overall, Fete Galante is open to a whole series of different meanings and readings, but perhaps it is precisely this sense of ambiguity, this mismatch of certain tenets of classical, traditional high art, and the emergent vocabulary of low art that causes the image itself to be considered over the specificities of what or who it represents. Bibliography Cowart, G., Watteaus Pilgrimage to Cythera and the Subversive Utopia of the Opera-Ballet, from The Art Bulletin, Sept 2001 Marshall, D. R., Watteau and Eighteenth Century Art Michalski, S., Watteaus Painted Conversations from The Art Bulletin, Dec 1994 Plax, J. A., Watteau and the Cultural Politics of Eighteenth Century France, University of Arizona Press, Arizona, 2000 Footnotes [1]David R. Marshall, Watteau and Eighteenth Century Art [2]Julie Anne Plax, Watteau and the Cultural Politics of Eighteenth Century France, University of Arizona Press, Arizona: 2000, p. 24 [3]Sergiusz Michalski, Watteaus Painted Conversations, from The Art Bulletin, Dec 1994, p. 2

Expansion vs. Preservation :: essays papers

Expansion vs. Preservation William Sonntag was acclaimed in the 1850s as a painter of the dramatic landscape. In his painting â€Å"Garden of the Gods,† Sonntag portrays a family in the time of the westward expansion. The very subtle painting, expressed by its loose brushwork, captures the shifting atmospheric contrasts of light and dark. Apparent in the painting is a family struggling to survive in nature. In the bottom left corner of the painting is a weather beaten shack, the home of the struggling family. This painting brings out the â€Å"live of the land† mentality, but it also incorporates the idea of expansion. When you think about life today, do we really need to expand? Does all this technology really make our lives better? Certainly, Ted Kazinski (aka â€Å"The Unabomber†) doesn’t think so. The well known advocate for a revolution against the Industrial system, the Unabomber believes the technological era will be a disaster to the human race. William Sonntagâ⠂¬â„¢s â€Å"Garden of the Gods† symbolizes expansion, as opposed to the Unabomber’s belief of preserving ones current way of life . The Unabomber’s ideal society would be that of life in the nineteenth century. It would be characteristic of life without TV’s to brainwash us with, no scientists and engineers to try to simplify our lives, and no cars to pollute our mother earth with. It all comes together in what we see in the â€Å"Garden of the Gods,† hunting for food to feed your loving family, living in a shack made by ones own god given hands, and entertaining each other by storytelling in front of a campfire. Depicted in this painting is a luminous reflection of the sun on what seems to be rock formation in the background. This symbolizes gods intervention into human life, and the spiritual livelihood that is inherent in all of us. It is the heavens that helps us to overcome our everyday obstacles. Conquering new ground wasn’t an easy task for many expansionists, confiding in god is what brought many of these settlers to overcome their fears and hindrances. Even though there are similarities between these two pieces, they still have one monumental difference. Expansion is what brings us to new levels. For many of these settlers, land wasn’t a necessity; they believed they were destined for more land.