Israeli Targeted Killings against HAMAS: Legality

Israeli Targeted Killings against HAMAS: Legality The Legality and Efficacy of Israeli Targeted Killings against HAMAS Extra-judicial killing is often referred to by the United States in the case of its enemies as â€Å"exporting terrorism,† and has gained special notoriety since its employment by the State of Israel in the years of the two Palestinian intifadas, or â€Å"uprisings.† The political assassinations and recent attempts by the Israeli government, disputed by many in the international community, are argued by Israel and the United States as legally sanctioned by Articles 2 and 51 of the United Nations Charter. Israel claims suicide bombings against its civilians have been curbed significantly by successful assassinations to which it fully admits, albeit each of these assassinations has resulted in â€Å"collateral damage† in the form of innocent bystander casualties. Others, such as Member States of the EU and the Arab League, have denounced Israeli assassinations as illegal. Whether or not the targeted killings were the factor behind the drastic reduction in suicide b omb and other terrorist attacks on Israeli citizenry is a point of major contention; several other factors including HAMAS’ calling of a hudna, or ten-year truce, in hostility and the construction of the separation wall along the UN-recognized â€Å"Green Line† demarcating Israeli from Palestinian land should be taken into consideration. One of Israel’s most impenetrable arguments in favor of the practice of targeted assassination is not deterrence, but rather preemption: â€Å"On November 9, 2000, Fatah leader Hussein Abayat was assassinated by fire from a helicopter, along with two women who were walking nearby. The killing initiated a new Israeli policy of publicly acknowledging assassinations—officially termed ‘targeted killings,’ ‘liquidations,’ and ‘pre-emptive strikes.’ This policy was premised on a set of interconnected justifications: 1) that Palestinians were to blame for the hostilities, which constituted a war of terror against Israel; 2) that the laws of war permit states to kill their enemies; 3) that targeted individuals were ‘ticking bombs’ who had to be killed because they could not be arrested by Israeli soldiers; and 4) that killing terrorists by means of assassination was a lawful form of national defense†[1]. The legality of Israeli targeted killings relies on a fine balance of situational interpretation of international law; while the Israelis never argue the validity of a law in the UN Charter, their political stance on the Palestinian territories often contrasts their approach in dealing with the Palestinians as a sovereign entity. Lisa Hajjar dissects the varied Israeli responses to intifada in her Courting Conflict: The Israeli Military Court System in the West Bank and Gaza, noting Israel’s relative position of morality and transparency in comparison to nations in similarly enduring conflicts. Hajjar notes that â€Å"what distinguishes the Israeli model from many other states embroiled in protracted conflict is that Israel does not repudiate or ignore international law†; â€Å"rather, it ‘domesticates’ international law by forging interpretations of its rights and duties in the West Bank and Gaza to accommodate state practices and domestic agendas†[ 2]. The Israeli government currently administers authority over the West Bank (referred to as â€Å"Judea† and â€Å"Samaria† in Israeli political circles), and since it controls Palestinian air space, borders, natural resources, and collects taxes from the Palestinian people, both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank would erstwhile be considered under Israeli sovereignty. However, the international community (which includes the UN) does not recognize the Israeli occupation, leaving the Palestinian situation somewhat in political limbo. The UN Charter, in Article Two, states â€Å"all members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state†; since â€Å"Palestine† is not a state under international law, this aspect of Article 2 does not apply. However, the simultaneous objections by the UN in the past, including the passing of more than sixty resolutions of which Israel is currently in violation[3], do not apply as according to the same Article, nothing â€Å"shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement,† including the â€Å"application of enforcement measures† taken by any given member state. By these technicalities, Israel is not breach of international law, since few international laws can apply to the occupied territories (OT) which have yet to be recognized as a sovereign state. Article 51 adds that â€Å"nothing in the present charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security†; moreover, â€Å"measures taken by members in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council† in order to â€Å"maintain or restore international peace and security.† Israel is transparent regarding its attacks and since the Jewish state technically is not attacking the Palestinians as a whole (hence the phrase â€Å"targeted assassinations†), it is not in breach of the UN Charter. Given Israel’s membership in the UN and the absence of sovereignty on behalf of the Palestinians, no claim can be made to the contrary vis-à  -vis international law. According to Hajj ar: â€Å"Many states engage in practices that deviate from and thus challenge prevailing interpretations of international law. However, when powerful and dominant states like the US and Israel do so, this cannot simply be written off or criticized as â€Å"violations† because it produces an alternative legality. Contrary to the claims of both critics who take prevailing interpretations of international law as their point of reference and political realists who disparage the relevance of law, neither state ignores the law. Rather, both use laws and legal discourse to authorize and defend the legality of policies such as military pre-emption, indefinite incommunicado detention, abusive interrogation tactics, assassinations, and targeting of areas dense with civilians†[4]. The efficacy of the targeted killings is disputed from a purely number-oriented statistical study. According to The Alternative Information Center on Palestine/Israel and the Israeli human rights organization B’tselem, Israeli deaths spiked in mid-2002, decreasing steadily through 2006[5]. Three cases of successful targeted assassinations on HAMAS (an acronym for Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiya, or â€Å"Islamic Resistance Movement†) to consider are those of former Izzedine al-Qassam (the militant wing of HAMAS) leader Salah Shehade in 2002, HAMAS spiritual founder and figurehead Sheikh Ahmed Ismail Yassin, and HAMAS co-founder Abdel Aziz al-Rantisi, who was killed within months of replacing Sheikh Yassin as the organization’s head. Between the established spike in violence in 2002 and the assassination of both Rantisi and Yassin in 2004, several events transpired. Between the assassinations of Shehade in 2002 and al-Rantisi in 2004, the Israeli army engaged the Palestinians with an incursion into the intifada stronghold of Jenin and began the construction of the West Bank separation barrier. Though the physical number of casualties decreased, the number of attempted attacks did not subside until as recently as December 2006[6]. While the execution of figureheads such as those named above are undoubtedly a positive force in the dissembling of HAMAS and other terrorist organizations’ leadership, the question of whether they are an effective means of deterrence and prevention is another issue, especially given the religious component of suicide bombing in the OT and its culture of martyrdom. To some extent, the system of targeted assassinations has been â€Å"marginalized as extrajudicial executions (i.e. assassinations) have come to vie with prosecutions as means of punishment and deterrence for suicide bombings by Palestinian militants†; both â€Å"suicide bombings and assassinations have a history that predates the second in tifada, and both emanate from human rights claims—dystopian in the extreme—to kill to survive†[7]. Perhaps more contested from a legal standpoint than the act of targeted assassinations is the factor of innocent bystanders caught in the crossfire. The area most targeted by Israeli assassinations, especially by aircraft, is the densely-populated Gaza Strip whose population of approximately 1.3 million is estimated by many to be the most densely-populated region in the world. The case of Shehade is one of the more notorious in recent Israeli history, whose death sparked the protests of â€Å"tens of thousands vowing revenge†[8]. According to CNN and other sources, a squadron of F-16 jets dropped an armament of significant magnitude on the apartment building in which Shehade lived; sources claim the armament deployed weighed nearly a metric ton. As a corollary of the attack on the â€Å"three story building in which Shehade lived,† fifteen other people, including women and children, were killed in the residential complex[9]. Justifying the attack that killed the archite ct of attacks that resulted in the murder of â€Å"hundreds of Israelis,† the assassination of Shehade prompted speculation that Israel had to have been cognizant that an attack of such magnitude would certainly result in â€Å"collateral damage†[10]. Active awareness of civilian death as a measured loss in such an action prompts the question as to whether or not Israel should have been held accountable on the same counts as groups like HAMAS, despite the difference in the nature of the attacks. Hajjar, whose writings lean toward the side of the Palestinian cause, nevertheless concedes unconditionally that â€Å"suicide bombings and assassinations can by no means be considered equivalent except in their effects (death)†; while the two are not the â€Å"only forms of violence that characterize the exchanges during the Al-Aqsa Intifada, â€Å"together they illustrate with brutal clarity the human costs of unbearable justice and intractable conflict†[11]. I n order to adequately address Israeli culpability in targeted attacks, one must first put into larger context the timing of such attacks. Unlike the first intifada, the roots of the second are â€Å"entwined in the military court system, which has been a central setting for the conflict†[12]. The second intifada in particular marked the change in Israeli occupation of the OT, an expansion from a predominantly â€Å"law enforcement model to a war model†[13]. Since the attacks on both sides escalated in both nature and cost, the Israeli retaliatory actions also warranted a change in their degree of severity. The deterrent component of Israeli retaliation to the first intifada was surmised to have failed, given the reorganization of additional terrorist organizations that despite their political competition inside the framework of Palestinian government collaborated in their attacks on Israeli citizenry. There existed a perception that â€Å"the duration of the first int ifada had forced the Israeli government to make concessions to Palestinians and that these concessions, namely the redeployment from Palestinian population centers, had weakened the military’s ability to provide for Israeli security, creating a reliance on the Palestinian Authority that was ineffective in preventing suicide bombings and other types of attacks on Israelis†[14]. A low-intensity, small-arms confrontation, the first intifada was dwarfed by the weaponry and frequency of attacks inside Israel proper. Where the first intifada was characterized by stone-throwing at tanks, the second is today notorious for suicide bombs and gruesome lynching of Israeli settlers and soldiers. While deterrence may not have been achieved, the escalation in the degree of Israeli retaliatory measures and those of pre-emption undoubtedly carried with it the intent to assert Israeli military dominance. Targeted assassinations took place long before the Al-Aqsa Intifada in 2000. While the legal ramifications of such assassinations are as yet to be officially disputed, the moral indignation inside Israel and abroad has been considerable. Opinions clash over the morality of such assassinations, even among Israel’s populace. Detailed by Nachman Ben-Yehuda in Political Assassinations by Jews: A Rhetorical Device for Justice, targeted assassinations should hardly be a significant point of contention in the international community. Though assassinations may be equated with executions (albeit doled out without formal trials), targeted attacks are not murder. Ben-Yehuda points out that â€Å"a political assassination event is typically carefully planned and cold bloodedly executed,† despite the large numbers of â€Å"collateral damage† as previously mentioned[15]. Israel has done well in the past to point to its critics the fact that â€Å"at the risk of seeming to provide a ‘justification’ for political assassination events in the form of executions, one must be reminded that selecting the route of political executions was in fact taken by governments in different cultures as a useful and pragmatic tool†[16]. Unlike Syria’s Asad regime, which in 1982 massacred nearly 40,000 members of the Islamic Brothers following an assassination attempt on then-President Hafiz al-Asad, Ben-Yehuda is careful to make note of Israel’s use of targeted assassination in specific cases when no other course of action will spare its soldiers’ lives. He makes a point to note that â€Å"while it is inaccurate to assert that political executions were a major tool used by Israel, it was used whenever the decision makers felt that executions could achieve specific goals like revenge, or in preventing future occurrences of aggres sion and violence against Israel†[17] . Ben-Yehuda also observes how some equate â€Å"a government’s reliance on assassinations to a ‘desperate gambler’s stroke’†; political analysts have speculated that â€Å"assassination is the tactic of the resource-less† and that â€Å"a government which cannot pursue foreign policy by conventional means and uses assassins instead is likely to be a government so vulnerable that its weapons perform like boomerangs in the hands of the inexperienced†[18]. America has recently endeavored to use the Israeli model of late, adopting the tactic of assassination in 2002 â€Å"which had been prohibited by executive orders since 1977†[19]. Studying Israeli legal arguments, the US militarily justified its assassination of suspected al-Qaeda member â€Å"Ali Qaed Sinan al-Harithi and five others (including a US citizen) in Yemen by a pilotless drone†[20]. Unlike, Israel, however, the US violated Yemeni airspace, a questionable act given distinction in its targeting of an American citizen. Targeted assassinations executed by the United States should not be conflated as a purely Israeli export, however; missions that transpired in the Vietnam conflict’s notorious Project Phoenix â€Å"neutralized 8,104 Viet Cong cadres† and was considered so potent a practice that the â€Å"Saigon interior minister set goals for 1969 noting the United States’ hope for 33,000 neutralizations through the rest of the year†[2 1]. While Israel used assassinations as a relatively domestic tool and was met with criticism, the majority of the world remained silent for several reasons in the case of America’s Project Phoenix. First, Israel has yet to officially declare war, as such a declaration would imply the sovereignty of Palestine as a nation. Second, the US was embroiled in a conflict that would later claim in excess of 50,000 soldiers and countless hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese. As a preemptive measure, Phoenix was morally admissible due to the magnitude of the conflict and the fact that Vietnam, official or not, was a multi-national, regional conflict and full-blown war. It should be noted that even in war, however, â€Å"Phoenix had become known and increasingly controversial in the US, a problem that would never cease† and added to the long list of grievances the American public would take with the war in general[22]. Robert Freedman recalls the Israeli public opinion of targeted assassination, stating â€Å"public opinion in Israel is characterized by high levels of knowledge and personal involvement regarding issues of security and by low levels of perceived influence†; â€Å"the public relies on the leadership and is aware of its own ineffectiveness† despite such reliance[23]. An open society, Israel’s actions are not only carried out on behalf of the people, but are approved by the people. As per the international outcry abroad, those who defend Israel’s actions—namely states embroiled in similar conflicts such as Serbia, Cyprus, and Russia—remained staunch allies and knew the endorsement of Israel’s actions would lessen international reaction to their own respective situations. Among Israel’s political adversaries, however, the escalation of the violence in the second intifada, along with well-documented media coverage of bus and cafà © bombings, changed the character of international outcry significantly. Unlike the PLO’s activities in the late 1960s through 1980, HAMAS and its extreme tactics of suicide bombing after 2000 earned the Palestinian cause worldwide antipathy as well as scorn directed at the Israeli state. Such changes in threats, Freedman argues, precipitated changes in responses which varied in intensity. The escalation of targeted assassinations was a two-fold public relations strategy. On the one hand, it showed a change from the popular perception of Israeli indiscriminate fire on the Palestinian population, and on the other, it showed a general concern for IDF soldiers and law enforcement, starkly contrasting the willingness of HAMAS and Islamic Jihad to knowingly detonate and kill its own members. Freedman notes how â€Å"the Israeli response to the threats posed by the PLO, particularly during the height of its armed struggle in the 1968-1971 period, was based on a combination of admin istrative, economic, and military actions†[24]. The military component and predominance of assassinations reflects the difference between PLO secularist attacks and HAMAS-style religious branding, adding more weight to the conflict and another dimension of severity. To date, the Israelis have been able to continue in their targeted assassinations, owing to a combination of brutal Palestinian aggression as well as the language of ambiguity adhered to in the UN Charter. BIBLIOGRAPHY Ben-Yehuda, Nachman. (1993) Political Assassinations by Jews: A Rhetorical Device forJustice. Albany: State U of New York P. Freedman, Robert Owen. (1991) The Intifada: Its Impact on Israel, the Arab World, andthe Superpowers. Miami: U of Florida P. Hajjar, Lisa. (2005) Courting Conflict: The Israeli Military Court System in the WestBank and Gaza. Berkeley: U of California P. Hirst, David. (2004) â€Å"Obituary: Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.† [Online Resource] Available at:http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1175854,00.html. Prados, John. (2003) Lost Crusader: The Secret Wars of CIA Director William Colby.New York: Oxford U P. Rice, Edward E. (1988) Wars of the Third Kind: Conflict in Underdeveloped Countries.Berkeley: U of California P. Various. (2007) â€Å"Al-Aqsa Intifada Enters Sixth Year.† [Online Resource] Available at:http://www.alternativenews.org/aic-publications/other-publications/al-aqsa intifada-enters-sixth-year-20050929.html. Vause, John. (2002) â€Å"Israel Takes Heat for Gaza Airstrike.† [Online Resource] Availableat: http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/07/23/mideast/index.html. Various. (2004) â€Å"Hamas Chief Killed in Air Strike.† [Online Resource] Available at:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3635755.stm Watson, Geoffrey R. (2000) The Oslo Accords: International Law and the IsraeliPalestinian Peace Agreements. Oxford: Oxford U P. Note: UN Charter available at: www.un.org/aboutun/charter Footnotes [1] Hajjar 2006, p. 238 [2] Hajjar 2006, p. 243 [3] Hajjar 2006, p. ix [4] Hajjar 2006, p. 246 [5] http://www.alternativenews.org/aic-publications/other-publications/al-aqsa-intifada-enters-sixth-year-20050929.html [6] Hajjar 2005, p. 244 [7] Hajjar 2006, p. 236 [8] CNN 2002 [9] Ibid [10] Ibid [11] Hajjar 2006, p. 36 [12] Hajjar 2006, p. 235 [13] Hajjar 2006, p. 236 [14] Hajjar 2006, p .237 [15]s Ben-Yehuda 1993, p. 354 [16] Ben-Yehuda 1993, p. 318 [17] Ben-Yehuda 1993, p. 354 [18] Ibid [19] Hajjar 2006, p. 246 [20] Ibid [21] Prados 2003, p. 210 [22] Prados 2003, p. 214 [23] Freedman 1991, p. 269 [24] Freedman 1991, p. 47

All The Pretty Horses Themes

All The Pretty Horses Themes Cormac McCarthys novel All the Pretty Horses is considered to be a national bestseller not only because it has won the National Book Award but also because the author could touch upon a number of themes which are really close to all the readers. Such themes as the themes of good and evil, and human nature are the most significant in our life. Moreover, Cormac McCarthy shows some kind of a conflict between a man and a woman, between the rich and the poor. My goal in this research paper is to analyze all the themes conveyed by the author in his novel All the Pretty Horses and to prove the fact that this novel is really the greatest American novel of 20th century . To achieve this goal, I have organized my essay into several sections, two of which have some sub-sections. In the first section of my essay, I am going to discuss the authors style of writing which impressed both the readers and the literary critics. In the second section of may paper, Id like to discuss the numerous themes using the contents of the book All the Pretty Horses by Cormac McCarthy. In conclusion of my essay, Ill summarize the main points of my paper and express my personal opinion on the issue discussed in my essay. Now Id like to turn to the first section of my paper. CORMAC MCCARTHYS STYLE OF WRITING AND ITS ROLE IN THE THEME PERCEPTION OF THE NOVEL ALL THE PRETTY HORSES Cormac McCarthys novel All the Pretty Horses, the first novel of his Border Trilogy, was published in 1992. All the readers were greatly impressed by his simple style of writing which was represented by the minimum use of punctuation, the absence of commas (in some places), dashes, semicolons, parenthesis, ellipses and quotation marks (especially in dialogues). The use of full stops is a standard use of punctuation in his novel. (Jarret) Most of the sentences are complex and long. In single sentences, the author describes numerous actions which are separated by a long chain of conjunctions. He minted a great deal of compound words which made his writing style unique. His prose represents a striking contemporary context both simple and highly accomplished. (Jarret) His style of writing is often compared with William Faulkner and Ernest Hammingways style. He became labeled writers writer. (Stephen) The author uses a lot of stylistic devises among which are various metaphors which make his speech vivid. Besides, Cormac McCarthy uses expressive imagery and different philosophical asides in order to develop the themes of his novel. (Bell) THE MULTIPLE THEMES REPRESENTED BY CORMAC MCCARTHY IN HIS NOVEL ALL THE PRETTY HORSES It is interesting to know that Cormac McCarthy is trying to convey many themes in his novel All the Pretty Horses. Id like to turn to most of them in my essay. Now some words about the main character John Grady Cole. A sixteen year old John Grady Cole lived with his grandfather on a small ranch in Texas. After his grandfathers death their ranch was signed to John Gradys mother, but she decided to sell it. The father of the young man was seriously injured in the World War II and he did not offer any help to his son John. So, the young man had no future in Texas and decided to go to Mexico. His friend Lacely Rawlins accompanied him. The Theme of Real Friendship. One of the main themes in this novel is the theme of good and evil. The main characters often run into both good and bad people. The sacred violence is shown throughout the novel. (Hall, Wallach) Of course, the best friends of them are the horses. What John Grady loved in horses was what he loved in men, the blood and the heat of the blood that ran them. (McCarthy) Lets recall the situation when John saw his horse Redbo in a stable for the first time after his jailing, Redbo whinnied and was very happy to see John again. As a matter of fact, the novel is focused on the horses. We can see how the characters of the novel catch and ride them, how they breed and rescue them. They not only talk about horses, they admire them and philosophize about them. Moreover, the horses are the main source which connects young people to nature. The horses represent a part of the beautiful landscape scenes which are described by the author in the best way. Also the horses help the main characters to escape from danger. The Theme of Inevitable Evil. The theme of inevitable evil is also shown by the author in his novel. Cormac McCarthy said that there is no such a thing as life without bloodshed and he proves this fact in his literary work. There are many examples of rage display, one of them is the following situation. John Grady and his friend Rawlings came to the La Purisima ranch. The young men were treated ill. Alejandra decided to use John as a so-called pawn in her rebellion. Rocha let the police to arrest the young men. Alfonsa fought against John Grady in order to get rid of the rage which was connected with her past. The young men could not believe that the members of two communities took concerted actions. They were thrown into the prison and blamed in committing a crime. These angry people were unjust to young men who were so innocent and could not do anything against their aggression. Rawlings decided to return home because he could not cope with injustice of human nature. John Grady tri ed to appropriate the violence which was inflicted on him and he wanted to take vengeance. He decided to return to San Angelo with two the most vital things he had his horses and his pride. (McCarthy) The Theme of Coming of Age. The other theme which is shown by the author in his novel All the Pretty Horses is the theme of coming of age. Cormac McCarthy represents the life of young people who rebelled against their family and found their love. For John Grady love is the main thing in his rite of passage. In San Angelo he was a stranger: his mother was indifferent to him, his father was a miserable ill man whose life was completely ruined. However, at the end of the story, we can see that this young man John Grady has got all the qualities to be a true hero who can easily be a good father to Jimmy Blevins, a rather dangerous boy, a passionate lover to the young girl Alejandra, a real friend to Rawlins. The most significant thing is that John Grady did not lose his faith. We can see a clever and an experienced man when he leaves San Angelo at the end of the novel. He returns to Texas a changed man but there is no home, nobody is waiting for him: his father is dead, his childhood nur se is dead too. The Theme of Competing Moral Codes. The theme of competing morals is also touched by the author in the literary work. Cormac McCarthy shows us the character of John Grady in such situations when he meets those people who are immoral. He fells his love for Alejandra in the context of right and wrong, Duena Alfonsa, Alejandras god mother, thinks quite the contrary. She wants John to leave Alejandra alone because Don Hestor will never permit her to marry a poor American young man. The captain and Emilio Perez repudiate the idea of tainted money. Moreover, they jeer the young mans opposition to pay for his way out of prison. It is clear that John Grady becomes a real hero not only due to his idealistic beliefs and his relation to life but also because he can give up his ideas in situations of restoring justice and saving life. For example, when Don Hestor asked John about his past, he did not tell him about Jimmy Blevins and the fact that he and his friend Lacey Rawlins may be on the wan ted list for the horse theft. The other situation takes place in the prison where John and Rawlins were taken. The young men are terribly beaten and John sees that Rawlins is seriously injured. John Grady kills a prisoner who attacked him and understands that the evil lives inside him too. Another situation which shows the moral codes of our characters is the last Johns meeting with Alejandra. He loved her, he wanted to be with her. However, she changed her decision and chose her family approval and life in the rich house. The Theme Of Love. Cormac McCarthy represents the theme of love through the relations of his main character John Grady Cole and a young beautiful girl Alejandra. Sometimes it seems that the author wanted to show the same story as William Shakespeare showed in his Romeo and Juliet. The young man John who was only 16 met a beautiful young girl Alejandra, the daughter of Rocha, at La Purisima hacienda where he and his friend Rawlins came to work as cowboys. The first time he saw her riding on a black Arabian horse and fell in love with her. She also fell in love with this young man. She invited him and his friend to the party where she danced with John. John found her hands tender and small and her waist nice and slight. In spite of warnings of Donna Alfonsa who protected Alejandra the young man and the young girl started to have rides at night time together, they went swimming at the lake together. They became lovers. She came to his room every night for a period of nine nights and they were happy to make love. However, then she returned to Mexico. John wanted to be with her and he went to Mexico City and found her there. However, Alejandra had changed. She said that she was afraid of her father who wanted to kill John. She decided to say no to John, and for the last time they made love in the hotel and then parted never to meet again. The Theme of Family Relations. Cormac McCarthy showed another important theme the theme of family relations by the example of John Gradys family. Such family relations affected his future and his character in a way. Johns mother left him when he was a baby. A Mexican woman took care of him and became his second mother. Johns father could not pay him attention because he was away taking part in the World War II but he taught him to love horses. Johns grandfather did not give the boy the parenting he wanted to get. The other character of the novel is Lacey Rawlins whose family was a poor one and he decided to escape and live alone. Jimmy Blevins, a small boy who was 13 years old, did not have a family at all. These young men needed family and were unhappy. Their unfortunate family relations had great influence on their emotional and psychological state. The Theme of Nature. The author pays special attention to nature in his novel. The beauty of nature described in the book helps him to show the characters attitude to the earth, horses, wonderful landscapes, lakes and rivers and reveal the best qualities of their characters. Johns relationships with horses show the close connection between nature and all the human beings. He had a long journey which changed him as a man. He experiences love and cruelty, theft and killing, prison and the system of justice. In each situation nature helped him to survive. CONCLUSION In conclusion, I should say that Cormac McCarthys novel All the Pretty Horses is really a great literary work which can teach us to love nature, to love our country and our family. It shows us how to fight with injustice and how to survive. I think that all the themes the author conveyed in his novel are still actual for the present day life. The author could discover human nature in his novel by the examples of main characters and their attitude to horses as a part of nature.

Bipolar Disorder and the Essay example -- Biology Essays Research Pape

Bipolar Disorder and the "War on Drugs" Bipolar disorder, also known as, "manic-depressive illness," is a brain disorder that results in unusual shifts in a person's mood, energy, and ability to function. More than two million American adults (or, about one per cent of the population aged eighteen and older in any given year) are afflicted by this affective disorder (1). Yet, because it cannot be revealed by a blood test or other physiological means, patients may suffer for years before it is properly diagnosed and treated. Fortunately, once one is diagnosed with bipolar disorder, the acute symptoms of the disease can be effectively mitigated by lithium and certain anticonvulsant drugs, the most popular being Depakote (also known as valproate). However, not all drugs are created equal. The New York Times recently featured an article elucidating that Lithium, the first drug utilized to treat bi-polar disorder, is more conducive to preventing suicide in people who have manic-depressive illness than Depakote, what has become the most commonly prescribed drug (2).. The new study, published in The Journal of the American Medical Association, found that patients taking Depakote were 2.7 times as likely to kill themselves as those taking lithium (2).. Although studies conducted prior to this have concluded that lithium could in fact prevent suicide, this report is the first to compare suicide and attempted suicide rates in lithium and Depakote users (2). Approximately fifty years ago, lithium "opened the modern era of psychopharmacology (3)." Its therapeutic effect is indeed very rapid. Administered in the form of lithium carbonate, it is most potent in treating the manic phase of a bipolar affective disorder; once the mania... ...ring of patients and critical treatment experimentation and evaluation may help physicians soon find peace. Sources Cited 1. National Institute of Mental Health: Bipolar Disorder http://%20www.nimh.nih.gov/publicat/bipolar.cfm 2. New York Times, 9/17/03: An Older Bipolar Drug Is Linked to Fewer Suicides in a Study (Denise Grady) 3. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 2001. Long-term Clinical Effectiveness of Lithium Maintenance Treatment in Types I and II Bipolar Disorders (Leonardo Tondo, MD) http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/full/178/41/s184%20 4. Physiology of Behavior (textbook, 7th edition, Neil R. Carlson) 5. American Psychiatric Association. Practice Guidelines for the Treatment of Patients With Bipolar Disorder; Part B: Background Information and Review of Available Evidence http://www.psych.org/clin_res/bipolar_revisebook_5.cfm

Philosophy of Teaching Essays -- Teaching Teachers Education Essays

Philosophy of Teaching I have known for a long time now that I want to be a high school Spanish teacher. There were other considerations for a while, but none that lasted very long; they couldn’t supplant what I felt so strongly about. Because of this, I have had a long time to think about exactly what the profession means to me. In my opinion, any teacher should be driven primarily by the desire to share his passion for a subject with others. A Spanish teacher (for example) should love the language and the culture that his class will deal with. Of course, many who love these things love them but are not teachers; I feel that teachers are possessed of a particularly strong passion for their subjects that compels them to educate others. I am certain that, unfortunately, there are teachers who do not feel so strongly about what they will teach, and I am doubly certain that these are not good teachers. In my opinion, such passion is the most important aspect of a successful teacher’s personality. There is a second facet of a good teacher’s personality that is almost as crucial, in my opinion: the ability to relate to his students on a personal level. These teachers recognize that their students are not merely students but also young adults and that they therefore carry with them all the emotional baggage of adolescence. They do not view their students as objectives or sets of characteristics but as people, and they understa...

Voltaires Candide Through My Present Day View Essay -- essays research

The world as I see it is not perfect. In this present day and age there are some people that like to believe that god created a beautiful planet, but I believe the devil should receive some credit for its creation also. One of the world’s greatest satires, Candide by Voltaire, some characters feel the same way that I do. However others do not. Martin, a skeptic thinks this is not â€Å"the best of all possible worlds† (â€Å"Candide†102), as Dr. Pangloss would say. My present worldview is more close to the view of the eighteenth century character Martin, in the book Candide. Martin, an old philosopher who embarked with candide shows strong pessimistic views. Candide is pretty much a follower and is not a very intelligent man. He looks up to Dr. Pangloss, his mentor. I disagree with candide’s point of view on life, because he is a follower of another man and doesn’t know how to live his own life. Through out the book Candide many of the characters die horrible deaths. The entire book is mainly a satire attacking simple human follies and frailties. The vice being ironically attacked here is optomisticism. Most of the characters are killed brutally or hurt fiercely for some of the most stupid reasons. One incident from the book involves Candide reuniting with his old master dr. Pangloss. Early in the book Candide reunites with Dr. Pangloss scabbed, spitting out teeth, and choking. Pangloss is diseased with syphilis. Pangloss obtained this disease from a slave girl named Paquette. This ...

Saving Private Ryan

The ingenious film, directed by Steven Spielberg, ‘Saving Private Ryan' is in my opinion the most realistic film to ever portray the D- Day landings. Many critics have even said it to be so vivid that the only element missing is the smell. In the Film's first battle scene, lasting twenty- five minutes in total, it brings all reality into the living nightmare that took place so long ago. Brought back into life by Spielberg, I will show how he creates excitement and tension in the most realistic of ways. I will discuss how he portrays the characters, his use of sound and last of all, his use of camera shots and how they contribute to the overall effect of the scene. Spielberg manifests an overall memorable opening scene and I will show just how. Released on the 24th July 1998, ‘Saving Private Ryan' promised to break all blockbuster records and go straight to the top. Spielberg stunned the world with the film's realism and authenticity, proving that his renowned reputation is not just hearsay, but fact. The plot is loosely inspired by the true story of the Niland brothers, where two of the four were killed and the third, presumed dead. The decision was made to retrieve the fourth, to prevent a national uproar and from a whole family from being wiped out due to War. The plot, proving exciting, brings much controversy over the mission to risk eight lives for the sake of one. The whole epic World War 11 drama cost approximately $65 million in total, most of which was spent on the graphic detail and effects in the first battle scene of the film. Although the twenty-five minute battle scene is complex cinematically and visually, the plot of the beach landings follows through reasonably simply. The scene starts off in focus of a small regiment of troops, quivering inside the hull of a boat, petrified by the sound of oncoming machine gun fire. The ramps fall down as a wheel spins round, pronouncing the ends to most of their lives. The boat opens out as many are shot dead instantly by the flurry of bullets thrust toward them. Few make it out a live before they have to plough through thousands of dead up the beach. As the battle scene cuts into view, the first character to be seen visually is Captain Miller. This immediately indicates that he is high up in rank and so, instantly gives him a commanding presence among the craft. The calmness of his voice even seems to sedate the tension in the atmosphere. However, the initial part of him to be seen is his pair of trembling hands. This conventionally is a sign of fear and to some, may show a weakness. Leaders are not usually associated with fear; stereotypically they are fearless. Spielberg has used this ironically, to show the realism within his character. All the soldiers fighting on that day were normal citizens fighting for pride and country. They all experienced fear. On D- day there were no fearless war heroes such as John Wayne and this is why Captain Miller, along with all the other troops, is shown in trepidation. As the shot moves outward, the whole of Captain Miller's body is revealed. His appearance can be seen and again realism is reinforced. The person acting as Captain Miller, Tom Hanks does not have the stereotypical appearance of a War hero; he is small, placid and in lack of the muscle attributes usually associated with a clichid soldier. Through this casting Spielberg conveys a message. The men fighting on that day were normal. They weren't all large men built of muscle, who could defy death and so, the person cast as Captain Miller isn't either. Through this, the character of Captain Miller is made realer to the audience, thus making the film more accurate and historically correct. On the beach, after the regiment has landed, the Captain experiences a brief period where his emotions and conscience are thrown into turmoil. The horror of what is happening around him starts to sink in, as all terror results in a mental breakdown. The fact that he does not just march through the beach and that he is affected shows his compassion and empathy. It shows he is a caring human being; one who is gravely affected by the horrific things being done to his comrades. Through this period of collapse, Spielberg creates lots of tension, as the audience, who have gradually started to become attached to this realistic character, are willing him to snap out of it and gain his composure. They want him to get out of this situation and lead his troops up the beach. Another character that stands prominent in this scene is that of Sergeant Horvath. Spielberg has used Horvath's character to contrast with Captain Miller, and this is seen even in the first few seconds of his dibut. Immediately as the audience set eyes upon his broad build, it can be seen that he is much more robust than the Captain and that he conforms more to the stereotypical image of a fictional war hero. I think that Spielberg has highlighted this point emphasise the normality and ordinary image of Captain Miller. He has done this to show that soldiers were all shapes and sizes. Through this contrast made, the realism of both characters is increased as they both can be recognised uniquely. Horvath and Miller again contrast in their methods of dealing with the trepidation and horror thrown at them. Whereas the Captain releases his petrified state through the constant trembling of his hands, Horvath allows his fear to disperse through chewing. Through Horvath's different reaction, Spielberg defines his character more, making him more realistic as he deals with situations in a different way. As soldiers in real life all reacted uniquely depending on their personalities, Horvath does too. The audience then can identify better with him, likening him to people they know, thus recognising him as a real type of person, one who is unique. Although Captain Miller and Sergeant Horvath contrast in many ways, together they form a prevailing partnership. In every order relayed by the Captain, the Sergeant reinforces it, thus portraying his regard, proving that he has an immense admiration for the man. Horvath continuously stays close to the Captain, waiting for his command and looking out for him. Spielberg uses him as the Captains right arm. Everything about Horvath, from his bear like face, down to his cumbersome build, shout; protector! In view of this, the audience take a liking to him and confide comfort in the fact that Horvath will protect and bring their ‘everyman' (the Captain) to safety. Spielberg uses the relationship between the two characters to excite the audience, as he shows that War is so out of the ordinary, that it brought together people in friendships who otherwise wouldn't have done so. Captain Miller and Sergeant Horvath have such a strong relationship during this scene that excitement arouses among the audience, as they know that together the two will survive. Private Jackson, the regiment's sniper is another character that has an essential role in the battle scene. His preliminary appearance is in the landing craft, immediately before the ramps descend. His face, being one of pure dread is an open book to the audience. He is so terrified that his expression and the first act that he commits, a kiss on a cross, show that he believes that there is no hope for survival left. It is as though he thinks that a kiss on the cross is the last action he is going to do and that if God is ever going to come to his aid, let it be now. I think that Spielberg has used this crucifix and his expression of misgiving, to draw compassion for the Private, but also to show how close death is to God. Immense suspense is created through the terror in Jackson's eyes. Private Jackson is not focused upon much during the struggle to gain ground and progress up the beach, however is substantial in the climax of the Scene. In this section of the scene, there is a long pause where the camera focuses upon the concentration on Jackson's face. He is speaking to God as he prepares to shoot and kill the Germans. During this moment of prayer, Jackson is in the action, yet alone and buried in responsibility. The long, seemingly calm pause is interspersed with other images of the dying, frantically praying to God in midst of all Chaos. Spielberg has used this range of images varied together, to prolong Jackson's pause, generating tension as the audience anticipate the outcome. The different images are of various scenarios, where like Jackson they are praying to God in their time of need. Although the requirements of God are very different, this just shows that whatever situation that people are in, the natural instinct at the end of the day, is to call for a supernatural being, to come at their rescue. The element of spiritual confiding in this, show again just how close death is to God and this is clearly portrayed when Jackson say's: â€Å"I am close to you Lord†. This is said moments before the Private shoots. He at this point is unsure of his survival and shows that he knows that he is incredibly close to dying. Spielberg lets the audience know this too and creates ample suspense through the pause. All tension that has been lingering is completely released when Private Jackson shoots and kills the remaining Germans. At this point the enemy onslaught has been destroyed and the American Soldiers are safe. Spielberg uses this point to release all of the excitement and tension that has been building up, transferring the audience into a relative calm. In the whole of the Battle scene, death is an element not escaped from. Spielberg has chosen to portray War how it really was, holding nothing back. In real life, death is not heroic; it is a tragedy that brings fear into the hearts of all men. It was not attractive, it was horrific and to keep it in line with realism. Spielberg too had to show it in this way. During the Scene, everywhere you turn, there is a person dying a painful death, with screams pronouncing the bodies awash with blood. Spielberg creates compassion among the audience, with empathy for the injured. However, he also arouses tension as the thought that maybe one of their favoured characters will be next, loiters in their minds. Spielberg has chosen to show death in such graphic detail, to keep nothing back from the audience. He wants to show it in a realistic way and I think wants to make it as authentic as possible. In other fictional War films, the Soldiers die heroically and for a patriotic reason. In reality, the Soldiers did not want to die and were scared out of their wits. Spielberg has portrayed it much truer to life and has steered away from these stereotypical films into reality, in order to keep the whole film's authenticity as honest as possible. Unlike the Americans during the scene, the audience does not see the Germans' faces. The camera shot restricts the view to distinguish only their backs, shoulders and arms from the rear. Spielberg has done this to dehumanise them, taking away the audiences empathy for their emotions. The eyes are said to be the ‘windows into your soul' and by masking their faces the audience cannot see them and therefore can't sympathise with their emotional state. The Germans were human and they too were going through the same trauma as the Americans. However, Spielberg wanted to get the audience biased toward the allies and so stopped the audience from having any compassion for the ‘enemy'. By doing this, Spielberg creates tension as the audience don't want the Germans (whom they have no emotional attachment to) to kill the ‘much loved' Americans. One machine gun post poses the greatest threat of all, mowing down life by life in every careless movement. The regiment of Soldiers, led by Captain Miller, work as a unified team to break past the barbed wire and screams of the dying. Taking cover, with the aid of their sniper, they kill they gunners and advance past the German bunker. All tension is then released; we know that for now that they are safe. Spielberg has used the characters in such a way, to reinforce the overall realism in the scene. By using one stereotypical character to represent the professional soldiers fighting on that day, he contrasts the rest of the characters to him, emphasising their statuses as average civilians. Through this contrast, realism is put into each of the characters as the realisation that these men were ordinary, comes into the minds of each spectator. Spielberg exploits the character's thoughts and feelings, making the audience connect with them, thus producing tension at the uncertainty of their survival. Through these points made by Spielberg, as a teenage male, I can appreciate the fact that these soldiers were not much older than I and that they weren't all war heroes, but young, petrified men. Sound is another resource greatly used by Spielberg. The ever-loud rapidity of war seems to up the pace of the scene constantly, heightening the adrenaline of the audience and bringing their physical emotional rate in parallel with the chaos on the screen. Spielberg produces immense excitement, as the audience cannot bear to look away. Every moment is unpredictable and so is the sound along with it and this is extremely exciting and tense for the spectator. The last and possibly the greatest used of all three techniques is that of camera work. Spielberg has used this element to create immense tension in the scene. He has done this most notably through a deception early on, by killing off characters that the audience have become attached to and so, simulating an emotion of loss. Through out the scene he has used a long lingering shots to contrast with the rapid staccato of battle, emphasising certain important pauses, thus also generating suspense. The shots of death throughout the scene are extremely moving and certainly cause every spectator to stop and think about the brave men who died on 6th June 1944. Saving Private Ryan It was an inspiration that the private Ryan should be sent safely to his home. The part in which the General read the Letter to Mrs. Bixby, written by Abraham Lincoln to sympathize the mother of five sons believed to have been killed in the American Civil War it is the film back to Rodat's Civil War inspiration. Spielberg in this film has innovated a style of direction. The director has made enormous efforts to make the movie seem real to the viewers. For this purpose, a ‘first person’ camera has been used and the cameras have not been installed right through the large scene, to show the actions, because due to first person camera, the viewer can eye witness the whole environment presented by the director. And as a result, throughout the movie; the consequence on the viewer is a feeling of actually being â€Å"present† during the scenes the scenes as intense as the assault on the beachhead and during the other action sequences. The viewer mind does not feel like a spectator, but rather as an interactive part of a moment in time. To give the real impact; underwater cameras were also used. Through these cameras fighting scenes under the water were clearly available to the viewers to witness, they could even see bullets striking the soldiers under the water. A huge amount of fake blood was used to make the viewer feel the scene real. By these efforts of the director the viewer gets actually involved and feels the dreadful environment of the war. In the beginning of the movie Tom Hanks who played the role of Captain John Miller leaded the company on the D-Day in the fight for Omaha beach. And now he is being sent on a risky mission in which he has to rescue a soldier. When the World War II was on going, the news is given to Chief of Staff, General Marshall that during the war, three brothers of the same family have died. The three brothers have died in action. And three letters were sent to their mother having the news of the death of her three sons on the same day, and their mother, Mrs. Ryan, could not bear this as it was very painful to her. And then he learns that a fourth son is also a soldier and he might be alive, the General plans to send a unit to find him and bring him back, in spite of being told that it's highly doubtful that he is still alive and the area that he was known to be at is very risky. As it was still a great chance that could alleviate the grief of Mrs. Ryan; the army did not miss the opportunity when they learnt that there is a fourth brother whose name was Private James Ryan. So it was decided to send the squad to locate him so that he can go back to his mother. So the unit consisting of 8 men is sent to find him but as affirmed it's very unsafe and one by one, each of them dies. It was a risky mission and the lives of soldiers were in danger. Captain Miller has the task to find Private James Ryan. On the way to Ramelle, Miller makes a decision to take the chance to neutralize a small German machine gun position near to an abandoned radar station. In the resulting fight the squad's medic, Wade (Ribisi) is gravely wounded. The last surviving German wraths the, squad members except Upham (Davies) because he used to be his friend. Miller decides to let the German walk away and capitulate himself to the next allied patrol. Reiben is no longer confident in the leadership of Miller and he declares his purpose to desert, brings about a tense disagreement with Horvath (Sizemore) that intimidates to split the squad apart until Miller finds a solution to the situation and reveals his origins, on which the squad had made a bet and after this Reiben decides to stay. The squad finally arrives to Ramelle where they demolish a German scouting unit with the help of some American paratroopers and one of them was Ryan. In Ramelle the unit gets regrouped. The American army defended the town and Ryan comes to know about the death of his brothers and the rescue mission. Ryan refuses to leave his makeshift unit, and demands that he want to help defend the bridge against a future German counter-attack. Miller unwillingly agrees and allowed Ryan to stay and orders his unit to help guard the bridge in the forthcoming battle. Miller takes command and sets up the defense with manpower and resources they have which were not very sufficient. Towed Flak 38 cannon and half-tracks were owned by the Germans. Thus they were well equipped. The defense operation was leaded by Captain Miller. Americans fought well and made the Germans face heavy casualties. But Germans have killed many Americans squad members. The American unit was devastated by Germans. The defenders had to leave the bridge because the German Tankers had made them suffer a lot . The bridge gets blown by the Americans but on the same time Captain Miller gets injured by the German. An American soldier destroyed the tank when it was about to reach the bridge. The American Army after this advanced even more and defeated the remaining German forces. But only few of American soldiers could survive which included: Ryan, Reiben and Upham. In the last moments of Miller; the last words which he uttered were this: â€Å"James†¦ earn this. Earn it. † (Spielberg 1998) Now the elderly man is being shown which was shown in the beginning of the movie as well. He is actually Ryan and he is at the grave of Miller. Ryan wanted to prove in front of Miller that he has spent his life as a good man. To get the confirmation he requests his wife to say that he has lived as a ‘good man'. And he has not let down Miller and the sacrifice he made for him. COMPARISON OF SAVING PRIVATE RYAN AND WAR BETWEEN GEORGIA AND RUSSIA: The war between Georgia and Russia can be compared to this movie in several ways; in fact all the wars can be compared to each other, as their consequences are always the same, each and every war results in bloodshed and loss of property and really precious lives. The attack of Georgia resembles Germany’s attack that began the World War II. The blood shed rate is high in this war also; it has also caused thousands of people and is the peril to world harmony. As both the nations are well equipped and do not hesitate in causing damages to the opponents. The 2008 war formally began on August 7, 2008 with a military attack by Georgia into one of two provinces, which had affirmed independence sixteen years ago in 1992. Russian quickly reacted with a large scale vengeance in the province and later invaded into Georgia proper. There are various comparisons between the ongoing war of Russia and Georgia with the movie Saving Private Ryan, some of which are discussed in details below: LOSS OF LIVES: So many people have lost there lives in both the depictions of war, i. . the Georgia and Russia war and the events of WWII that have been presented in the movie. Rivers of blood are flowing and everywhere in the environment cries can be heard, war is the second name of devastation. Blood and only blood can be seen all around. The reality of war is extremely brutal. WEAPONS USED: The means of attacking the opponents are almost the same in the movie and the Russia Georgia war. Massive firepower was used in both of them. Tanks attacked the militants as well as the civilians and also jets were used for the attacks. THE REASONS BEHIND THE ATTACK: The causes of both the wars were unknown initially; as both the attacks were made unilaterally, and then the suffering nations had to counter attack in their defense. In the Russia Georgia war, heavy bombardment started from Georgia’s side and in the movie the assault began from the side of Germany. CONCLUSION: This description of war and the portrayal of war which the movie â€Å"Saving Private Ryan† presents seem the same; by reading all these details we imagine blood and painful voices all around. Not only the militants but the civilians also equally suffer; just as the movie has presented the war; the actual war between Georgia and Russia is equally cruel. The war is always horrible, whether we see it in reality or through any other medium. The sketch this movie makes in the mind of the viewer is the actual representation of brutalities of war. Another comparison one can find between these two can be the loss of lives of the militants which so sincerely fight for the defense of the nation and yet meet very cruel deaths. War is nothing but an extreme threat to the people and our mother earth.

Kant’s Moral Rationality Essay

In Kant’s book, The Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals, he believes that the â€Å"good will† is only good in itself and that reason is what produces the â€Å"goodness† of the â€Å"good will.† According to Kant, to act out of a â€Å"good will† means to act out of â€Å"duty,† or doing something because you find it necessary to do. Also, â€Å"good will† is will that is in accordance with reason. He believes everyone has a moral obligation or duty to do actions and he backs his theory up by discussing his idea of the â€Å"moral law.† The â€Å"moral law†, according to Kant, is when one is to act in accordance with the demands of practical reason, or acting done solely out of respect of duty. He says that moral laws will make you will in a certain way and is not subject to something further. Moral laws apply to all rational being in all places at all times. Overall, he believes that morality is on a basis of a priori, or preceding experience. This type of moral law commands us to be truthful from respect for the law and to do the right thing. Morality is about categorical commands that we ought to follow simply because it is the right thing to do. By categorical commands, or categorical imperative, it is supposed to provide us with a way to make moral judgments, which means it is a law. It is a way of coming up with the idea how any action can be rational. He means since all externals are taken from morality, moral commands must be categorical. In his book, Kant explains that he makes five things perfect clear: 1. All moral concepts have their origin entirely a priori in reason. 2. Moral concepts can’t be formed by abstraction from any empirical knowledge or, therefore, from anything contingent. 3. This purity or non-empiricalness of origin is what gives them the dignity of serving as supreme practical principles. 4. Any addition of something empirical takes away just that much of their influence and of the unqualified worth of actions performed in accordance with them. 5. Not only is it necessary in developing a moral theory but also important in our practical lives that we derive the concepts and laws of morals from pure reason and present them pure and unmixed, determining the scope of this entire practical but pure rational knowledge. (Kant 17) Kant goes on to discuss a relationship between the moral law and reason. He says that moral philosophy cannot be merely an empirical inquiry, but that is must be a metaphysical inquiry, and that it must be based on pure practical reason. Pure practical reason is the reason that drives actions without any sensible incentives. Kant also states that Morality is based neither on utility or nature, but on human reason. And this human reason tells us what we ought to do and when we obey this human reason, then we can say we are truly free. Finally, Kant discusses why he thinks that the moral is the rational. He believes that acting dutifully is the same as doing something because rationality tells you to do it. In section three, he discusses how moral principles come from yourself, or your rationality. And how one should treat the idea of will of every rational being as a universal law. Thus, rationality requires us to be moral.