Pros and Cons of Globalization Essay Example for Free

Pros and Cons of Globalization Essay Former CEO of Vodafone Group, Mr. Arun Sarin, at the 2009 Global Business Forum debated that there is a profound change occurring in the world today. The world is becoming more interconnected due not only to physical infrastructure but also the intellectual and software infrastructure that is being built; moreover, the way in that trade is being done today. For him, the United States is still the most powerful country in the world; however, if the country wants to have global excellence in the future, innovation is a most. Since its earliest appearance, about three decades ago, the term globalization has been used to describe a process, a condition, a system, a force, and an age. The term signifies a social condition characterized by the existence of global economic, political, cultural, and environmental interconnections and flows that make many of the currently existing borders and boundaries irrelevant. Globalization suggests dynamism best explained by the idea of change and the transformation of present conditions. In other words, globalization is an ongoing process rather than a static condition. According to Manfred Steger, author of the book: Globalization: A Very Short Introduction, globalization refers to a multidimensional set of social processes that create, multiply, stretch, and intensify worldwide social interdependencies and exchanges while at the same time fostering in people a growing awareness of deepening connections between the local and the distant. In the other hand, globalization is a complex and contradictory phenomenon that encompasses progress and degradation, opportunity and compulsion, freedom and restrictions. These countless contradictions are points of political contestation. Advantages of Globalization * Countries around the world have made the choice of establishing trade relationships with each other in order to improve their economy. Past hostile experiences were left behind, and globalization has announced an era of international peace and security. In addition, there has been propagation of democratic ideas among countries. * Countries have resolved to test free trade with some regions. Eliminating taxes, duties, and export/import quotas has allowed consumers to buy goods and services at a lower cost. * Globalization is encouraging the use of international connectivity such as the internet. Exchanging thoughts and ideas is helping interlink people around the world. * Several companies are investing in other markets providing better employment opportunities for skilled and unskilled labor all around the world. Globalization is helping in increasing the standard of living of the developing world; and at the same time is helping to reduce poverty. * Competition among different countries is leading to international innovation and quality goods. Consumers are benefited in the process because they get quality products at a cheaper rate and from a large variety available in the market. * Mutual trade has brought an understanding of the importance of protecting the environment and natural resources. Global environmental problems are being discussed. Disadvantages of Globalization * Many people from develop nations are losing jobs since corporations are outsourcing work to developing countries due to savings in cost of labor. There is a lot of pressure in the develop world; people are always under the threat of their job being outsourced. Outsourcing has resulted in unemployment. * Any sort of economic disruption in one nation will have a domino-effect on other nations that are closely related to that country in terms of trade and commerce. * Influence of local cultures and traditions will slowly start to wear down. Western ideas will impose over other cultures. * Globalization may lead to more environmental problems. A company may want to build factories in other countries because environmental laws are not as strict as they are at home. * Income distribution within countries is becoming less equal. The rich is getting richer and the poor is getting poorer. * Transnational integration and increased mobility has simultaneously strengthened and diminished the protection of individual rights and the dignity of individuals. Globalized markets have facilitated more monitoring of social conditions but have also opened up more opportunities for economic exploitation. Example of the pros and cons of globalization The Philippines is one of the countries in Asia that has been affected by the contradictions of globalization. The country is taking part in the process since it became part of the World Trade Organization in 1995. Globalization has allowed major changes in the nation like more labor, more Filipino foreign companies, high levels of education, and high per capita income. Philippines have four regions that globalization has targeted and these four are: liberalization, mobility of capital, technology, and management of organization through private and public sectors. Nevertheless, the Philippine state has failed in organizing a socioeconomic environment that would have prepared the country for global competition. Many Filipinos believe that globalization has done nothing for their country. And this is due to the poverty that has been becoming worse each year. The Philippines is still corrupt and still faces economic and political problems, therefore, the nation and its people does not trust the process of globalization. About 60% of the population lives in poverty and poverty levels are still increasing. The institutional framework of a country, its political culture and the quality of its leadership play an important role in fostering economic development and in promoting social welfare. For some, globalization can make the Philippines a better nation if the Philippine leaders get involve in allowing for more global trading and more foreign investors to the help boost the economy. And by accomplishing those goals, the Philippines should be able to reduce poverty levels. The Future of Globalization Globalization is transforming the structure of worldwide interaction and people are changing along with it. The positives aspects of globalization are becoming more significant than the negatives ones. In the long term, the world will be transformed into a more prosperous, democratic, and peaceful environment. This may means that cultural conflict and global chaos will occur in the short term but large economic growth and democratic governance will prevail in the long term. Globalization is making the way for free trade and international business. It is also improving communication around the world. The biggest advantage is that globalization has the potential to make the world a better place to live in. Globalization cannot be stopped; however, leaders should always be on the top of its spread and outcomes. Work Cited Steger, M. B. (2004). Globalization, a very short introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, USA. Retrieved from http://library.books24x7.com.dml.regis.edu/SearchResults.aspx?qdom=authorscol={all}qstr=Manfred B. Steger Hill, C. (2010). International business. (8 ed., Vol. 5). New York City NY: McGraw-Hill Irwin. Rupert, M., Solomon, S. (2006). Globalization international political economy. Rowman Littlefield Publishers INC.

Abraham The Origin Of Islam And Christianity Religion Essay

Abraham The Origin Of Islam And Christianity Religion Essay Abrahams story is one of the complicated texts in both the Quran and the holy bible (Froese 12). Shosh (526) notes that its image is variably presented in the two contexts. While many scholars in religion have concentrated on understanding Abrahams sons: Ishmael and Isaac (Murray 298) and their roles in the origin of Muslim and Christian communities, Abraham is a very influential figure in the origin of both religions (Shosh 527). This essay gets out of the way and argues that Abraham is the sole father of the two religions. The argument will isolate Abrahams character from his sons at the specific case of sacrifice of his son to God (Genesis 22: 1-9 Q 37:105). Sons roles in his life may be mentioned; their characters in origin of the two religions are insignificant in this essay. The Quran and holy Bible give a contradictory story about this topic. Abraham had two sons: Ishmael and Isaac (Genesis 11-12 Q 2-3). The bible in Genesis presents Ishmael as son born by a slave, Hagar; while Isaac as the true son of Abraham (Murray 309). Quran presents both as biological sons of Abraham. Which of the two sons did God ask for a sacrifice from Abraham? This is a difficult question to answer at our generation. According to the bible, Isaac was the only son of Abraham (Genesis 21) who was born under the power of God; Ishmael and Isaac were both the sons of Abraham (Q 2). Quran stipulates that Ishmael, the first born of Abraham, was the sacrifice God asked from Abraham (Q 37:105) whereas on contrary, the holy bible states that Isaac, the only child of Abraham, was the sacrifice God wanted from Abraham. Which text is right to follow? Anyway it does not matter for this argument. The fact is Abraham offered to sacrifice his son to God (Fischer 173). According to Shosh (527), Abrahams character has been viewed in different perspectives. Abraham is a profound character in matters of faith and religion; he cannot be overlooked in the study of both Islam and Christianity. In the story of sacrifice of his son, Abraham appears the first and last, both in the bible and Quran, to be posed such a difficult task by God. As Murray (300) notes Abraham heeded to this call. From this story the essay will justify why Abraham is the father of Islam and Christianity. Christianity calls for absolute obedience to God. Christians should obey all the ten commandments of God. When Abraham was called by God to offer the sacrifice of his son, he did not question. He obeyed. Abraham took his son, Isaac, the following morning and headed for the place of sacrifice (Genesis 22:3). Abraham was determined to offer the sacrifice of his only son to God. He is revealed as the father of obedience which Christians must look up to. On the other hand, Quran states that Abraham offered to sacrifice Ishmael to God (OKane 500). Ishmael was his older son and indeed closer to him; in fact they preached together in Arabia while Isaac preached in Palestine and Syria. To the amazement of many Abraham admitted to the call of God to sacrifice him. This was a sign of great obedience. Muslims have a call to abide to the rules of Allah as the only God. Abraham is the beacon of obedience. Abraham was the first to believe in both body and spirit to the one God. He was against the worship of idols which was practiced by his forefathers (Q 21:60). He preached believe in one God (Q 6:76 Froese 15). Indeed, Abraham believed in God in heaven. Accepting to offer his son to God was a sign of deep believe and trust in Him. To believe in God is to accept unconditionally to His call; heed to His laws. Abraham demonstrated believe in God which is what religion is all about. Muslims are therefore called to believe strongly to Allah as the only God. As Fischer (174) argued, Gods call to Abraham to make human sacrifice was an indication to both the Christians and Muslims that He is not interested in human sacrifice. When Abraham had just laid his son, Isaac, down to slay him the angel of God appeared to him and stopped him from doing that (Fischer, 176 Genesis 22:9). This is an indication that God is not interested in human sacrifice. Throughout the Christian history human sacrifices have never been advocated for. In the Quran context it is stated that God warned Abraham not to lay the knife to his son, Ishmael. Islamic religion does not offer human sacrifices as well. In my own opinion God used Abraham to send a message to the whole nations: God does not need human sacrifice. He is a sign of anti-human sacrifice. Why did God ask for human sacrifice from Abraham when He never needed it? This is the interesting question we need to answer in analyzing this story. Fisher (176) thinks that God wanted to expose the human nature through Abraham. Fisher further argues that God expected Abraham to bring a controversial discussion in the matter. I do not agree with Fisher. God is the creator of man; He knows his personality. There was no way God could test the nature of man. In my own view God wanted to use Abraham to reveal to the world the ideal nature of those who will inherit His kingdom. In natural sense, death especially for ones child is not as light as Abraham took it. God had inspired him first before putting him into this test. And because Abraham would be celebrated as the father of religion all over the world God made him act the way he did. In this story God wanted to clarify that religion is not contradicting. As Fisher (176) notes, God did not want to contradict himself by allowing Abraham to slaughter a son whom He had asked from Him for more than ninety years (Genesis 22). Christianity today should learn from the father, Abraham that God laws are clear and do not change. It should be clear that God remained faithful to Abraham. If God allowed Abraham to slaughter his son it would be a contradiction of a promise that Abraham would become the father of all nations. On the other hand, God would not let Ishmael be slaughtered as a sacrifice; Ishmael had been assisting Abraham in preaching in Arabia. In this argument therefore Abraham laid the foundation of religion; no contradiction. What could have happened if Abraham objected to the call of God? The religion today would not have the same meaning. God would have expelled Abraham out of His kingdom. This what the religion today holds: excommunication to the victims of r eligious contradiction. God appeared to Abraham when he had almost slaughtered his son (Genesis 22). In Qurans view Abraham had fulfilled the vision and kept His word. God wanted to use this chance to tell the Islamic religion that there is a vision in this life. Adhering to the word of Allah is the only thing to bring the vision into realization; this would be at the end of time. In Biblical view, God provided an alternative to Abraham to offer sacrifice, a lamb. This has a meaning for the Christian community: God is the solution to all the problems. It is in the same context that God sent Jesus Christ to save the world. Vision and hope are the basis of these religions. CONCLUSION The story of sacrifice by Abraham has been differently interpreted by the two texts as earlier mentioned. In both Islam and Christianity; however, Abraham plays one role-The father of religion. He represents an ideal of holy mosque and church. His character has been put in the religious history to define the way for religion. By demonstrating strong believe and faith in God, Abraham revealed to the world that there is one supreme God who should be worshipped and obeyed. Islam emphasizes on one God who should be worshipped: Only Allah Should be worshipped. Where did they derive this from? The immediate answer is Abraham. Christians believe in one God who is the father and almighty. They are indeed descendants of Abraham. Abraham is therefore the father of Islam and Christianity.

Much Ado About Nothing Essay: The Importance of Word Choice :: Much Ado About Nothing Essays

Much Ado About Nothing:   The Importance of Word Choice  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚      The choice of words used by the characters in Act 5, Scene 1, of the play, Much Ado About Nothing, clearly presents the characters emotions and constructs their characters for the audience. In contrast to his confrontation with Claudio and Don Pedro earlier in the scene, where he is reduced to begging them to hear him out ('My lord, my lord!'; Act 5, Scene 1; l. 106 ), Leonato's speeches are marked with a stateliness and self-assurance, as he has been fortified with the knowledge that his righteous indignation is justified. He is stern and dominates the scene, barking orders 'Which is the villain?' (l. 260), 'Bring you these fellows on.' (l. 333), and using the conversation to entrap, as Claudio and Don Pedro did to him during the aborted wedding: Art thou the slave that with thy breath hast killed mine innocent child?. No, not so, villain! Thou beliest thyself. Here stand a pair of honourable men; A third is fled, that had a hand in it. I thank you, princes, for my daughter's death. His true purpose is manifested to the audience in the way he addresses the prince and Claudio: this time he doesn't bluntly insult them, but uses more subtle language - 'Record [Hero's death] with your high and worthy deeds. 'Twas bravely done, if you bethink you of it.'(l. 270-271) - because he intends to perform one last deception, to get Claudio to marry Hero, so his strategy must be to play on their guilt, not to antagonize them: '.since you could not be my son-in-law, Be yet my nephew. And so dies my revenge' (l. 288-289, 293). He seems to see himself as the rightful patriarch, restoring order - '.This naughty man Shall face to face be brought to Margaret, Who I believe was packed in all this wrong, Hired to it by your brother.' (l. 298-301) - and his speeches have an air of stateliness and dignity (all are in verse), as well as an air of busyness, exemplified in the orders he gives, lines 280-294: Possess the people in Messina here How innocent she died; and if your love Can labor aught in sad invention, Hang her an epitaph upon her tomb, And sing it to her bones, sing it tonight. Tomorrow morning come you to my house. The emotion of earlier in the scene seems to have been spent - this meeting can be seen as Leonato's personal revenge, restoring his authority and reputation: his fatherly concern about Hero's reputation is no longer necessary, her name is merely an instrument to shame the princes.

The Love Scene between George and Maire from Translations Essay

The Love Scene between George and Maire from Translations This scene, in my opinion is the dramatic centre of Translations. The scene displays that George and Maire have fallen in love as they return from the dance together; the pair find it hard to communicate, and exhaust every method of communication before reciting place names to one another. The common language of the place names increases the tension between George and Maire until, finally, they kiss. The kiss is witnessed by Sarah who uses her new found talent of speech to tell Manus. The scene, in my view is very important as it is the catalyst for the disastrous events which follow, it leads to the disappearance of George, the search of Baile Baeg by new English soldiers, Maire’s despair, and the imminent ‘evictions and leveling of every abode’. The stage directions play a prominent part in the scene, they specify darkness and music being played, the music is significant as it is a common form of communication, everybody can relate to it. The ‘music rises to a crescendo’ as Maire and Yolland enter on stage and the audience are involved in the excitement and merriment of the pair. The music also crescendos later after Sarah has seen them which emphasizes the significance of what has just happened. The stage directions also describe their actions towards one another, the gestures and the pause before the kiss; all which would add a lot of drama and pace to the scene. Act 2 Scene 1, which is just before the love scene, is very different. Maire and George at this point are still very shy and use Owen to translate everything between them: Maire: Tell him then Owen: Tell him what? Maire: About the dance. Maire is essentially inviting Ge... ...hows that she has gone to tell him about George and Maire, bring the scene to a climax. It is also poignant that after Sarah has been given the gift of speech, she is now about to use it to tell her teacher and change everything in Baile Baeg, possibly costing George’s life. As the scene acts as a microcosm of the play’s messages, Friel displays the themes of translation, cultural differences and conflict of interests all in one scene. As a result, I think that this is a very important, if not the most important scene of the entire play, as the scenes before all build up to this moment, and the later events preceding it are all results of George and Maire’s union. Brian Friel has also managed to keep the audience interested by using tension, pace, irony and suspense; and successfully brings the end of the act to a climax, keeping the audience engaged.

Literary Theory and Criticism: Investigating Literature and Literary Study

Literary theory, literary criticism Methods of studying literature are defined and described. A section on definitions and distinctions investigates literature and literary study; literary theory and literary criticism. First of all it is necessary for us to know the definition of literary theory, and literary criticism. Nevertheless, the distinctions between literary theory, criticism, and history are the most important Literary theory is the study of the principles of literature, its categories, criteria, and the like. The theory of literature investigates the general laws of the structure and development of literature.The history of literature studies the literary past as a process or one of the stages of this process. On the other side, literary criticism is the study, evaluation, and interpretation of literature. Modern literary criticism is often informed by literary theory, which is the philosophical discussion of its methods and goals. It is also concerned with the most recen t, the â€Å"present† state of literature. Literary criticism is always interested in evaluating a literary work. But even though, these two are closely related, literary critics haven’t always been theorists.Some critics consider literary criticism a practical application of literary theory, because criticism always deals directly with particular literary works, while theory may be more general or abstract. Even though literary theory and literary criticism may be defined distinctly, they are not completely separated. It seems best to draw attention to these distinctions by describing as â€Å"literary theory† the study of the principles of literature, its categories, criteria, and the like, and by differentiating studies of concrete works of art as either â€Å"literary criticism† (primarily static in approach) or â€Å"literary history†.Of course, â€Å"literary criticism† is frequently used in such a way as to include all literary theory ; but such usage ignores a useful distinction. Literary works which have been evaluated as important can than be used to draw general conclusions on a genre. This is the case with Aristotle’s Poetics. The close relation between literary theory and criticism and the other humanities was formerly reflected in the concept of philology as a synthesizing branch of learning, studying culture in all its written manifestations, including literary works.In the mid-20th century the concept of philology suggests the affinity between literary theory and criticism and linguistics; in the strict sense philology denotes textual criticism. Even after these obvious differences, complete separation is impossible, it is inconceivable to have literary theory without criticism or history, or criticism without theory and history, or history without theory and criticism. It’s all connected. Aida Belovodjanin

The Wys in Which Steinbeck Presents Conflict in George’s Relationship with Lennie

‘Of Mice and Men’ is written by John Steinbeck, published in 1937. The novel is set in the 1930s during the great depression in California. The two protagonist characters, George and Lennie are farm workers who have a dream of one-day owning their own ranch. They find work in a ranch near Soledad which means loneliness in Spanish, after escaping from Weed because of George’s incident. They are met by different characters on the farm that all have a dream. In this story, the characters are lonely because although they are all together they all feel very much on their own. George and Lennie do not see themselves as lonely as the other characters because they have each other and a dream to go away one day together. In the novel there are two main characters, Lennie and George who are friends. ‘They had walked in single file down the path and even in the open one stayed behind the other. Both were dressed in denim trousers and in denim coats with brass buttons. Both wore black, shapeless hats and both carried tight blanket rolls slung over their shoulders. From the first sight of Lennie and George, a dynamic in their relationship is established. Though the men are outwardly of the same class (wearing identical clothes and carrying identical gear), one still walks behind the other. George is, of course, the leader, but it seems he doesn’t value himself as necessarily superior to Lennie; they’re both in it together. Lennie is a simple chap who has the mind of a child; George feels a need to look after Lennie and so takes on the role of a protective parent. While this thing going on George often gets frustrated with him because he has to look after him all the time and he doesn’t have time for himself. On this George says: ‘Whatever we ain’t got, that’s what you want. God a ‘mighty, if I was alone I could live so easy. I could go get a job an’ work, and no trouble. No mess at all, and when the end of the month I could take my fifty bucks and go into town and get whatever I want. ’ Steinbeck goes to great length to create very different personas for the two men even making the two different physically. In the later part of the text George says ‘If I was your relative I’d shoot myself. ’ This shows that George doesn’t really care for Lennie and he just wants an easy life as a migrant worker. At this time, The Great Depression, workers had to keep a job to keep them alive, so it was important to get the destination. Lennie at this time is being frustratingly slow therefore George is getting angry. The word ‘relative’ in this context means that George doesn’t want the responsibility of Lennie because he can live a lot easier without the burden. However as they only had each other George was reluctant to leave Lennie and travel alone, even though there were frequent conflicts between them. The context of the novel fits well with the scene when George is shouting at Lennie, after losing another job. Lennie has just been fired because he was accused of sexually assaulting women, when actually he didn’t. George knows this and stuck up for Lennie, resulting in Lennie being fired too. ‘I got you! You can’t keep a job and you lose me every job I get’. Here George loses his temper with Lennie, because once again they have been fired from their jobs, it causes conflict between the two. ‘I got you! ’ is a cruel and unnecessary thing to say, here George is insulting that his whole problem in life and the main reason for this upset is of the fact that he is having to put up with Lennie, it shows how much conflict and hurt was caused was caused in the 1930s, because the lack of money and food, all added up pressure, and resulted in mean outbursts like this. George seems to be of two minds when it comes to Lennie. He complains constantly that if he did not have Lennie he would be done with a huge responsibility. He could go to town, drink when he wanted, have a girlfriend, shoot pool, and in general have a life. Tired of constantly reminding Lennie things he should remember, George gets quickly angry when Lennie forgets to get the firewood, for example and instead goes after the dead mouse. On the other hand George’s anger is quickly under control and he blames himself for scolding Lennie. Steinbeck makes it clear that, despite his complaining and frustration, George looks out for Lennie and genuinely cares for him. The fact that George has repeated his instructions many times, the fact that he scolds Lennine for doing things (like petting the dead mouse or drinking the untested water) that could hurt him, and most importantly, the fact that George retails the story of their shared dream indicate the close relationship the two men have. In fact, George acts as a parent towards Lennie. He treats Lennie as one would treat a child, he laughs a great deal at Lennie’s words, and because he knows how much Lennie likes soft things, he promises to try to get Lennie a puppy and let him take care for the rabbits when they finally get their own ranch. LENNIE ‘I was only foolin’, George. I don’t want no ketchup. I wouldn’t eat no ketchup if it were right here beside me. ’ GEORGE ‘ If it was here, you could have some’ LENNIE ‘But I wouldn’t eat none, George. I’d leave it all for you. You could cover you beans with it and I wouldn’t touch none of it. ’ After George’s mean outburst about how much better off he’d be without Lennie, Lennie is the one who makes the first move to apologize for being a jerk. Even after this awful fight, the men’s friendship has a simple and remarkable erectness. George grudgingly knows he’s wrong and in fact he really loves his friend, and even though Lennie can’t express it in a terribly complex way, he loves George back.

American novel Essay

Inspiration is something that some people have difficulty finding, whether to write the great American novel or simply to get out of bed in the morning. Creative inspiration is much more delicate a subject, as when one does not feel the desire to create, the product most often suffers greatly. However, for me, creative inspiration comes from almost everywhere I look, as long as I manage to see beauty before me, and luckily, the world is a beautiful place. Beauty is truly everywhere; it can be in a sunset, a work of art, or in a masterpiece of architecture. There is manmade beauty and natural beauty, and both have unique appeals that inspire to humans in many different ways, including creatively. Along with the millions of writers, painters, and poets that came before me, I find creative inspiration in noticing the beauty of things, no matter how common or rare. I can also find beauty amidst things that are ugly, if anything gaining an increased appreciation for the beautiful moments of peace and lightness. No matter how much I suffer or observe suffering, it is easy for me to remember that life is indeed beautiful, and this often inspires me to continue creating beauty of my own. Human physical beauty is also something that inspires me creatively. It is impossible to deny that certain men and women are not beautiful, for a perfect face and body attracts many people from all around; however like the old adage that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, everyone else may not universally agree upon the external and physical beauty of these people. Some people make think blonds are beautiful, while others prefer brunettes; some people may like blue eyes, while others only find brown beautiful. This shows the subjective nature of beauty, which begs the question as to whether this beauty is significant at all or merely a matter of taste. However, like the beauty of Helen of Troy, legendary and often referenced in all arts, beautiful people inspire me to create. But, while physical beauty can inspire me to create, it is most often the beauty I find within people and myself that most inspires me. I believe the greatest and most inspiration beauty in life comes from within; and this kind of beauty can be achieved by everyone without pills, painful operations, or costly beauty treatments. I have learned not to put too much stock in the media’s representation of beauty, because I feel it robs from the more significant beauty that can be achieved in society when people think of each other and treat each other with equal respect and consideration. I do my best to live by the golden rule, and find situations the most beautiful when others do the same. I feel that many of the popular conceptions of beauty are based on half-truths and blatant deceptions, encouraging people to hide their flaws rather than love themselves. For me, honesty is beautiful and inspirational, and I try always to be honest, and subsequently inspired. Life is beautiful enough without having to worry about perfecting physical attributes, and the truth is that aesthetic beauty is not nearly as lasting or inspirational as emotional, spiritual, and mental beauty. These are the kinds of beauty to which I aspire and have successfully managed to cultivate in my efforts to harness creative inspiration. While beauty may truly be in the eye of the beholder, I feel confident in my own beauty because I treat everything in life as it is: beautiful. From this view, it is easy for me to find creative inspiration in just about everything I see, hear, and feel. I find joy and inspiration in everything, and I try to make everyone share in the beauty that I possess and inspiration I find, hoping that they can also create his or her own. I try to be truthful in all regards, and try never to feel insecure that my beliefs in my own beauty are false. I refuse to adopt the media’s perception of beauty, and prefer to find my own conceptions in what I see is true beauty: generosity, compassion, and joy. All I have to do is sit back for a moment, reflect on the wonders of existence, and I will inevitably be convinced of the beauty of life, and subsequently inspired to create some of my own. For me, this is the truth, and like the words of John Keats, â€Å"Beauty is truth, truth beauty,—that is all/ Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know† (Keats, 1901). For me, beauty is truth, and truth is inspiring. REFERENCES Keats, J. (1901/1999). Ode to a Grecian Urn. The Oxford Book of English Verse. Ed. Quiller- Couch, Arthur Thomas, Sir. Bartleby. com. 31 Jul 2008. .