The History of Leap Year

A leap year is a year with 366 days, instead of the usual 365. Leap years are necessary because the actual length of a year is 365.242 days, not 365 days, as commonly stated. Leap years occur every 4 years, and years that are evenly divisible by 4 (2004, for example) have 366 days. This extra day is added to the calendar on February 29th. However, there is one exception to the leap year rule involving century years, like the year 1900. Since the year is slightly less than 365.25 days long, adding an extra day every 4 years results in about 3 extra days being added throughout 400 years. For this reason, only 1 out of every 4 century years is considered as a leap year. Century years are only considered as leap years if they are evenly divisible by 400. Therefore, 1700, 1800, 1900 were not leap years, and 2100 will not be a leap year. But 1600 and 2000 were leap years because those year numbers are evenly divisible by 400. Julius Caesar, Father of Leap Year Julius Caesar was behind the origin of leap year in 45 BC. The early Romans had a 355-day calendar and to keep festivals occurring around the same season each year a 22 or 23 day month was created every second year. Julius Caesar decided to simplify things and added days to different months of the year to create the 365-day calendar; the actual calculations were made by Caesars astronomer, Sosigenes. Every fourth year following the 28th day of Februarius (February 29th) one day was to be added, making every fourth year a leap year. In 1582, Pope Gregory XIII further refined the calendar with the rule that leap day would occur in any year divisible by 4 as described above.

Gay Marriage Moral or Immoral - 2203 Words

RUNNING HEAD: GAY MARRIAGE 1 Gay Marriage Moral or Immoral? William Hadley SOC 1120: Intro. to Ethics and Social Responsibility Christine Villasenor July 11, 2011 Ashford University GAY MARRIAGE 2 Marriage has been an important institution throughout the centuries. In the United States, most adults are married and live with their spouses. (Marriage. (2010) Credoreference.com) It is common knowledge, however, that the number of â€Å"traditional† marriages have declined in the last century and same sex marriages have increased over the last few decades.†¦show more content†¦Many states will not GAY MARRIAGE 4 allow marriage between close relatives, such as first cousins, and no states allow marriage between parents and their children or marriage between two siblings. There are eleven states that recognize â€Å"common-law† marriages, which is a situation when two people live together as man and wife and present themselves as such in the public eye. Same-sex marriages have occurred throughout history however until 1995 were considered â€Å"universally unacceptable†. (Same-sex Marriage. (2010) Credoreference.com) When did same-sex marriage become an issue? First, we have to go back to the Gay Rights Movement that dates back to as early as December 31, 1966. (Thomas, J. (2011) Slate.com) On this date, about one dozen policemen dressed in street clothes were present at a bar named the Black Cat, a bar located in Los Angeles. At the stroke of midnig ht, the â€Å"gay† men in the bar celebrated with the â€Å"traditional† New Year’s Eve kiss and they were attacked by the policemen and hit in the head with clubs. (Thomas, J. (2011) Slate.com) According to Slate.com, sixteen patrons in the bar were arrested and the bar owner was also arrested along with three others that came to her defense. Lillian Faderman and Stuart Timmons’ book, Gay L.A. stated that one of the bartenders suffered a ruptured spleenShow MoreRelatedWhy Shouldn’t Tommy and Jim Have Sex? An Essay by John Corvino859 Words   |  4 Pagesargument that gay sex is not â€Å"unnatural† in any moral way. However, this argument is easy to critique when considering opposition from natural law theorists, democracy, and other perspective ideas. In order for Corvino to make his position that gay sex is not morally â€Å"unnatural†, he must first respond to several arguments. Many natural law theorists believe that sexual organs should only be used for three distinct purposes; reproduction, making a home for children through marriage, and emotionalRead MoreEssay on The Bond of Marriage1166 Words   |  5 PagesThe Bond of Marriage The argument to allow gay couples to marry has been a debatable topic for many years. The authors, Andrew Sullivan and William Bennett have conflicting beliefs to whether gay marriages should be permissible. Sullivan expresses his opinion of the right gays have to marry in his article â€Å"Let Gays Marry.† Bennett retaliates with his own article opposing gay marriage. His article â€Å"Leave Marriage Alone,† relates his view that same-sex marriage is wrong and unethical.Read MoreThe Moral View Of Homosexuality1708 Words   |  7 Pagesconsidered moral or immoral has been an argument for as long as humans have been in existence. This argument has been viewed by philological experts and people all over the world for centuries and it continues to be a major argument today. The moral view of homosexuality has many arguments, but the arguments that are going to be mentioned are the normative ethics argument, the argument on why the moral law is true when it comes t o homosexuality, and why homosexuality should be viewed immoral in today’sRead MoreReligion And The Civil Rights Movement954 Words   |  4 Pagesobtain gay and civil rights has been directly influenced by religion, either in a positive or negative way. More specifically, religion has served as a disadvantage to achieving gay rights and an advantage to those that participated in the civil rights movement. Contrary to the recent successes of the gay rights movement, there have been a lot of obstacles along the way and most of them have been due to religious beliefs and practices. Religion opposes gay rights, especially gay marriage on the basisRead MoreThe Issue Of Gay Marriages1028 Words   |  5 PagesSeptember 2, 2015 The Issue Of Gay Marriages Through The Eyes Of Sociologists Gay marriages have been an ongoing event in the United States for many years. It was not until June 26, 2015 when gay marriage was legalized for all states with a five to four ratio. With gay marriage being legalized, there became many controversies in the nation. The most recent controversy was when a Kentucky county clerk was jailed after defying a federal court order to issue marriage licenses to a same-sex couple. SheRead MoreTaking a Look at Same-Sex Marriages1029 Words   |  4 PagesSame-Sex Marriages Over the years, the levels of acceptance to same-sex marriages have risen gradually. On large scale, much of this ‘acceptance’ comes in the form of tolerance. It is now perfectly bearable for heterosexuals to turn show approval of their relatives or their friends procuring gay marriages. After all, it is much easier to put aside one’s distaste to this occurrence, than face the vicious accusations that would follow if they said a word that in the least betray their objections.Read Moremoral or immorral Essay456 Words   |  2 PagesMoral or Immorral #61656; People consider nature morality. They associate nature as being pure and good. Unnatural as being corrupt and evil. #61656; Morality is based on spiritual and personal beliefs and on accepted standards for the respect of others. #61656; Good judgment should not equate whats common with whats right or good. Nonconformity is not the same as immoral. #61656; Some people confuse what is with what they think ought to be. #61656; Nature is a moral. Not moralRead MoreWhy Gay Marriage Should Be Banned in Georgia1100 Words   |  5 Pages Why Gay Marriage Should Be Banned in Georgia Georgia has always been a state where family values and community issues are important in our society. Many people who live in the southern United States have always been for conservative and or republican values. This typically involves a christan background, and therefore, the people of Georgia should not support gay marriage because most people are Christians. Also there is a code of natural law that must beRead MoreGay Marriage Should Be Legal1159 Words   |  5 PagesConstitutional Amendment, which puts a ban on gay marriage. This amendment entitles to equal rights to the gay community, ending toleration of discrimination in jobs, rights protecting gays from hate crimes,rights allowing advancement in government. However, the concept of gay marriage is still not considered a right the American people should extend to homosexuals. II. The vast majority of opponents believe marriage should be between one woman and one man, meaning marriage should be between members of theRead MoreHomosexuals Have Every Right to Marry686 Words   |  3 PagesHomosexuals have every right to marry. Marriage is a basic human right, if straights can marry in all states then so should gays. Gay rights of all kinds are starting to become increasingly protected. â€Å"In every courthouse, in every proceeding and in every place where a member of the department of justice, stands on behalf of the United States, they will strive to ensure that same-sex marriages receive the same privileges, protections and rights as opposite-sex marriages, under federal law.† -Attorney General

19th Century Theories in Dostoevskys Crime and Punishment free essay sample

19th Century Theories in Dostoevskys Crime and Punishment I teach you the Superman. Man is something that has to be surpassed. What have you done to surpass him? These words said by Friedrich Nietzsche encompass the theories present in Dostoevskys nineteenth century novel, Crime and Punishment. Fyodor Dostoevsky, living a life of suffering himself, created the character of Raskolnikov with the preconceptions of his own sorrowful and struggling life. Throughout his exile in Siberia from 1849-1859, his sentiments of suffering, sorrow, and the common man surfaced and heightened, inspiring him to begin writing Crime and Punishment in 1859. The main motif in this novel is that of suffering. It is apparent that all characters, major and minor, experience some sort of internal or external affliction. The overall theme of the work is that all mortal men suffer, and that salvation can not be obtained unless this anguish is present. Dostoevskys protagonist, Raskolnikov, must evolve and realize this fact to overcome his conflicts and reach the salvation of peace and tranquillity. We will write a custom essay sample on 19th Century Theories in Dostoevskys Crime and Punishment or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Volumes and volumes of critique can be written on where this suffering originated, but Dostoevskys main concentration and focus is not here, but why suffering must exist and how this suffering can be overcome. This is seen from the fact that throughout the six sections of the novel, only one section is focused on the origin of the torment the Crime, and the remaining five sections are concentrated on Raskolnikovs path to overcoming this anguish the Punishment. By focusing solely on the punishment, the internal and external conflicts that arise within the novel do not only provide Raskolnikovs own philosophy of the path toward salvation, but encompasses that of the German philosopher Nietzsche, as well as his contemporaries. Raskolnikovs ustifications for his actions are relayed in his own Extraordinary Man Theory, which states that there are two classifications of men in the world: ordinary, and extraordinary. He wanted prove that he was extraordinary, that he could commit a crime as horrid as murder, but because he did it for the betterment of society, he would feel no sympathy or regret for his justified actions. In following Raskolnikovs theory, it becomes apparent from where his conceptions originate. Though the whole work encompasses the philosophies of all the nineteenth century theorists, Raskolnikovs ideas spawn from that of Friedrich Nietzsche and Georg Wilhelm Hegel. Since it has already been established that the entire novel contains theories of its era, to begin an analysis in regard to the novels main ideas evolving from the concepts of merely Nietzsche or Hegel would, in a way, belittle the importance of the remaining non-Hegelian nineteenth century philosophers. By analyzing the ideologies of the major theorists from Father to Fruitcake (Kierkegaard to Freud) with respect to Crime and Punishment, Dostoevskys intentions, motifs, and ideas can be interpreted with ease. Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) believed that truth is both power and suffering. He is often noted as the Father of Existentialism, an innovated modern belief that life has no meaning, and that we must live life just for the sake of living, and nothing else. To know the truth about life and the individuals living it would be a form of powerful knowledge incomprehensible to man. The truth is Life is suffering. Kierkegaard believed that man was blessed with the greatest gift of all free will, but this free will creates decisions, and decisions generate emotions. Emotions are the key to the suffering of man. Happiness creates a fear in losing prosperity, fear leads to anger toward lifes unjust ways, anger leads to hatred of life in general, and hatred eads to the suffering of the individual mind. This is the path of the common man, the man who thinks that life can be blissful. The existential man believes that life has no meaning, no substance, and no path for happiness. He is the man who knows and accepts that all things, good and evil, exist, including suffering. This is why the existential man i s indifferent toward the benefits and consequences of life. Raskolnikov believes that The Extraordinary Man feels no suffering and no pain. He is the man who can break the laws, transgress the laws, and make the laws. Raskolnikov believed that if he were extraordinary, he could commit any rime, even the crime of murder, and walk away from it indifferent, apathetic, and without emotion. What he did not realize was the main point of Kierkegaards philosophy, that no matter what man suffers. Raskolnikov thought that he could avoid the truth and avoid suffering. It is not until he confesses to both Porfiry and Sonia, which coincidentally is the same instant that his own pain begins to vanquish, that he fully understands and believes in the suffering of man. Georg Wilhelm Hegel (1770-1831), another prominent philosopher of the nineteenth century, hypothesized a dialectic method for the analysis and comprehension of istory. He believed that all events in time move in a teleological fashio n contrary to the popular belief of a circular path. Hegel stated that history, rather than repeating itself, learns and moves forward toward a purpose. In his theory this purpose is the freedom of all men in a rational state, and moving toward such a beneficial purpose justifies all good and evil events in history. The dialectic method also consisted of a diagram regarding this teleological path. Hegel believed that history is made up of a series of events all corresponding to a thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. The thesis and antithesis serve as the conflict n history, while the synthesis becomes the result. In Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov is the thesis, the symbol of good intentions, while Svidrigailov is the antithesis, the epitome and reality of evil and suffering. With the battle of good and evil comes salvation, or the synthesis, in this case Sonia, the representation and key to Raskolnikovs salvation. This method can also be viewed in the perspective of Dostoevskys pr imary concentrations. With that respect the crime can be viewed as the symbol of good intentions. Raskolnikov killed Alyona because she represented the evil in society. Because her death would be a blessing nd benefit to the world he believed his crime would be justified. The punishment can be viewed as the reality of suffering. It is not until after he commits the crime that Raskolnikov realizes that all men in fact do suffer. The key is to overcome this suffering instead of avoiding it. The salvation can be viewed as the redemption and end to suffering the result of the crime and of the punishment. This analysis also maps Hegels teleological perspective because the novel moves in a linear fashion. The Crime (thesis) encompasses Part I of the novel, the Punishment (antithesis) is demonstrated in Parts II-VI, and the salvation (synthesis) s introduced in the epilogue. Friedrich Nietzsche (1844- 1900) did not believe in the suffering of all men. He believed that there existed a supe rman, a powerful individual that lived for self-gratification and nothing else. The Nietzschean superman asserts his own power to situations while he watches the common and ordinary man suffer because of lifes imperfections. This man needs no justification in his actions, because as long as he has satisfied himself, then his dominance over others requires no reason. Nietzsche also believed that in order to become a superman, an individual must surpass the common man. He must have no qualms or regrets in his actions, and above all, he must not fear his actions or consequences. Fear is the mother of morality, it is an emotion only known to ordinary men. A superman has no fear. Perhaps the character of Svidrigailov emits the best example of a Nietzschean superman in the novel. He is the epitome of evil and lives only for self-gratification. His downfall to his superman visage is suicide. Death is the escape to suffering. Svidrigailov feared its company, and in turn, took his own life to avoid it. Raskolnikov on the other hand, did not avoid suffering he conquered it. Though before his crime he did ask the Hegelian question of Will this crime serve a noble purpose, he also asks the Nietzschean question of Do I dare commit this murder and therefore prove myself to be a man by proving that my will is strong? It is after this that he commits the crime and begins to endure this suffering. Unlike his rival, Svidrigailov, Raskolnikov overcomes his pain through salvation with the help of Sonia, ends his isolation, and returns to the humanity of society. Karl Marx (1818-1883) believed that society was the root of suffering. His common man, the proletarian, struggled because of the capitalistic ourgeoisie. He believed that the proletariat goes through various stages of development. The first stage is the struggle against the bourgeois, which later turns to suffering. Through the growth of the masses, the final stages of the common man of strength and victory evolve. The goal and path of the Marxist man is to emerge from being a mere commodity of society into being a creative and active member of it. The strength that allows him to do this is the realization that he is suffering because he lives for others, and his victory is obtained by overcoming this anguish through the bond of the proletariat. Though Raskolnikov does not face the same pain of worthlessness as the proletariat, he develops in the same fashion. He struggles against his inner emotions of reason and morality, and suffers because of it. Though Sonia and Porfiry contribute to his salvation, it is Raskolnikov himself that overcomes his emotions. He does not need the bond of the masses to aid him in his survival and path toward salvation; he only needs the bond of his inner rational and emotion states. This is why Raskolnikov survives. In 1859 the theorist Charles Darwin (1809-1882) published a controversial book of survival entitled The Origin of Species. In this work Darwin established that an organisms evolution or devolution in life is representative of their ability to conform, adjust, and survive within the harshness of its environment. This theory of survival of the fittest, later became the coined theme of Social Darwinism. Social Darwinism believes that man survives and prospers in nature because he is the organism that is fit enough to do so. In a battle between man verses nature, and even man versus society, only the strong shall survive, while the weak will parish. Faith and belief no longer have any bearing on the members of tomorrows society, only trength. This theory is presented many times in Crime and Punishment. Alyona and Lizaveta both perish because they are not capable of defeating Raskolnikov. Alyona also did not survive because Raskolnikovs beliefs were stronger than her will and intentions. Svidrigailov cannot conquer the constraints society has placed upon him, and in turn, he commits suicide. The only exceptio n to this theory is Raskolnikov. His inner strength of intelligence may be strong, but his physical and emotional abilities do not coincide with Darwins notion of fit. Raskolnikovs survival is from his redemption. He reaches salvation because he chooses to, and therefore he survives because he chooses to. He does this through his own realization and rationalization. The psychologist and theorist Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) believed that an individuals decisions are not always determined by the rational state of mind. He believed that all humans possess three distinct decision making chambers of human behavior. He refers to the first of these as the id. The id is the childhood and instinctual need of the individual. This is the sector that satisfies an individuals wants and desires, accomplishing them at no fear of risk. The econd portion of human behavior is referred to as the ego. The ego is the rationalist, the sector that makes decisions that benefit the individual and society. Freud believed that the majority of all individuals make decisions based on their ego. The final and third division of an individuals behavior is called the superego. The superego is the ideal individual. This individu al makes decisions that should be made; he does things the way they should be done in his opinion, and no matter what the results may be, has no reason for regret. Though most of the characters in the novel make decisions based upon their ego, it is evident and apparent hat Raskolnikov does not. He knows what he believes to be right and wrong, and tries to right the wrongs in society with his superego. Though he is the only one to use his superego, all of the other Freudian sections of human decisions exist in the work. Throughout the novel, Svidrigailov uses his id. His encounters with women, prosperity, and fortune are not prolific because he deserves them, but because he wants them. It is his id that leads him to his desire for an end to suffering, and his death near the end of the novel. Sonia and Dounia both rationalize their actions through their ego. Though Sonia does not and should not be a prostitute, she knows that it is the only way for her family to survive. Dounia is in a similar predicament. She did not wish to marry Luzhin, but his wealth and proposal to help Raskolnikov rationalized her to stay. Later, her ego permits her to marry Razumihin for his compassion, admiration, and companionship. This use of the id, ego, and superego supply a Freudian element to Dostoevskys work. With all of these theories analyzed, computed, and settled, we can end this critique where we began: I teach you the Superman. Man is something that has to be surpassed. What have you done to surpass him? Is Raskolnikov a Superman? Well, he follows Kierkegaards existential statement of I believe, therefore I am, which means that he surpasses the common man who merely thinks. Through the ideas of Hegel, his teleological movements from crime to punishment all serve a justified purpose in benefiting his moral and rational states. He overcomes the common man through the salvation he obtains from this linear evolution of trials. He suffers not from Marxist classes, but from internal struggle, excluding him as a member of the proletariat, or common man. Though not physically or emotionally fit to survive, his confession becomes his salvation, his survival, and his disclaimer in the Darwin theory of surviving. The common man may survive because he is fit to survive, but Raskolnikov survives because he chooses to survive. Unlike Freuds theory that the everyday man lives his life through his ego, Raskolnikov makes his decisions based on his superego, doing things not just because it would be rational, but because that it the way it should be done. So then, Is Raskolnikov a Superman? Yes.