Speech Act Theory Implications For English Language English Language Essay

Speech Act Theory Implications For English Language English Language Essay Speech act theory was introduced by J.L Austin in How to Do Things with Words. Later John Searle further expanded on the theory, mostly focusing on speech acts in Speech Acts: An Essay In The Philosophy Of Language (1969) and A Classification Of Illocutionary Acts (1976). Searle further defined speech acts and categorised them. First of his five classifications were Representatives, where the speaker asserts a proposition to be true, using such verbs as affirm, believe, conclude, deny, and report. The second category is Directives, when the speaker tries to make the hearer do something, with such words as ask, beg, challenge, command, dare, invite, insist, request. The third is Commissives, where the speaker commits to an action, with verbs such as guarantee, pledge, promise, swear, vow, undertake, warrant. The next category is Expressives, where the speaker expresses an attitude to or about a state of affairs, using such verbs as apologize, appreciate, congratulate, deplore, detest, regret, thank, welcome. And the last category is Declarations, where the speaker alter the external status or condition of an object or situation, by making the utterance, for example: I now pronounce you man and wife, I sentence you to be hanged by the neck until you be dead, I name this ship.and so on. (Searle, 1976 ) There have been additions to this list, however, the focus of this essay is on how meaning is communicated from the speaker to the listener(s), how it is interpreted and how they are related to TEFL. It will focus on the three types of meaning an utterance has, but it will not explain the types of speech acts in detail. According to Austin (1962) speech act is a functional unit in communication. Its an act that a speaker performs when making an utterance. (LinguaLink website) Utterances have three kinds of meaning (ibid) which are Locutionary, Illocutionary and Perlocutionary. (Schmidt, R. Richards, C. 1980, Cohen, 1996) Locutionary act is saying something with its literal meaning. (Searle, 1969) For example, in saying I am cold. the locutionary meaning is that I feel cold. Illocutionary meaning is the social function of the words or the way they are intended to be understood (Ibid). For example I am cold. may actually be a way of asking the other person to close the window. If this is the intention an Indirect Speech Act (Austin 1962 Searle 1975) had been performed because the meaning is dependent on the hearers interpretation of what has been communicated. The Perlocutionary meaning (ibid) is the effect or the aim of the utterance on the feelings, thoughts or actions. The Perlocutionary force of the utterance I am cold. could be that the listener closes the window. If it was the intended outcome from the words the perlocutionary force (result or aim) matches the illocutionary meaning (intention). This may not always be the case, which is called Perlocutionary failure (Leech, 1983: 204-5). A very c ommon example is that Could you pass the salt? (Searle, 1969) is a request rather than asking about ability (Fraser 1983: 29). Also the sentence Why are you so sensitive? is more likely to be a criticism rather than a question. (Pinner, 2008). There are a number of empirical research on practical applications of speech acts for language teaching. Bardovi-Harlig Hartford, Blum-Kulka Kasper, Olshtain Cohen, Schmidt Richards and Wolfson researched and evolved the implications of speech acts for English language teaching. The teaching of speech acts becomes more intriguing regarding cross-cultural pragmatics. The findings from a cross-cultural study by Cohen, Olshtain, and Rosenstein (1986) showed that non-native speakers (NNS) were not aware to certain sociolinguistic distinction that native speakers (NS) make, for example excuse me versus sorry or really sorry versus very sorry. One of the first studies that focused on first language (L1) and second language (L2) speakers while performing speech acts was The Cross Cultural Speech Act Research Project (Blum-Kulka, House and Kasper 1989). It was observing and analysing the differences of seven languages in how they use the speech act of request and apology. (1989: 11). The study looked at social distance and dominance (Wolfson, Marmor and Jones, 1989: 191). The findings revealed that the foreign speakers responses were quite different from native speakers answers and that not just low but advanced level learners can make sociolinguistic errors. Furthermore according to Boxer Pickering (1993: 56) sociolinguistic errors are gaps in etiquette or as Bachman terms in sociolinguistic competence(1990). He states that these errors are more serious than grammatical errors (Crandall Basturkmen 2004: 38) Hence explicit teaching of pragmatics would be beneficial to language learners, (Rose Kasper, 2001) because acquisition of native like production by non-native speakers may take many years even if they are in the target culture (Schmidt, 1993: 25-6). There is a divergence between the responses of native and second language speakers of English, therefore the explicit teaching of illocutionary meaning and conducting certain types of speech acts has value for s tudents (Blumka-Kulka, House, Kasper 1997, Schmidt ,1996, Bardovi-Harlig,1999). Cohen (1998: 66-7) also advocates the need for explicit teaching and notes that it does not take a long time for students to put the knowledge from speech act training into use, if the learners want to fit in and to be accepted in the target culture. Cultural contrast does not only exist between speakers of different languages. There can be also a cultural contrast when the native language of the speaker is the same but the culture is different. For example, Creese (1991) discovered differences between American and British speakers of English in dealing with compliments. Gumperz (1982) looked at variations between British-English and Indian-English speakers when performing speech acts in institutional settings. These studies have implications for TEFL and for English as a Global Language .They also introduce the limitations of appropriateness. A number of studies (e.g., Boxer Pickering, 1995; Bouton, 1994; Kasper 1997, DÃ ¶rnyei, 1997 Bardovi-Harlig, 2001) have shown that language learners with high grammatical proficiency are not always competent in pragmatic aspects of the foreign language (FL). As Boxer Pickering (1995) point out grammatically advanced learners may not know how to use appropriate language in different situations and digress from pragmatic norms of the target-language. They might directly translate speech acts from their mother tongues into the target language when they are trying to get the intended meaning across. Teachers often disregard pragmatic failures and they sometimes assign them to other causes, for example to disrespect. (p. 47) The contrast in cultural norms may reduce speech act theory being universally relevant to language, but there is a definite need for teaching them in the language classroom. Bardovi-Harlig and Hartford point out that theories related to teaching and learning are cultural and they are usually not shared when teacher and students have different backgrounds (1997: 129). Boxer and Pickering (1993:45) states that the appropriate speech behaviour depends on the rules of the societies. On the side of overtly teaching illocutionary force and meaning Schmidt (1993: 25-26) discusses the value of making learners conscious of the meanings or functions of various speech acts. He talks about consciousness perception and lists examples from his acquisition of Portuguese. He observed how to end a phone conversation. Before this observation he was not confident of what to say when finishing a phone conversation, but after he was able to make use of this new knowledge (Ibid: 29). From my own experienc e it was really useful when someone explained the different phrases to me that I should use in English, because I came across as being rude at many times without me intending to be rude or even knowing about it. It is important to make the students aware of expressions and phrases, such as Id better let you get back for saving face of both parties when closing a conversation as learners often express difficulty.(Schmidt 1993: 29).Cohen (1996: 411) also states that explicit teaching of speech acts helps learners in communicating with native speakers in real life. Widdowson (2003: 04) points out that theory and practice in ELT should not be separated. Teachers should not go into explaining the theory in details, but this does not mean the two should be separated. If learners are to be effective in acquiring a language they need to have a certain amount of sociolinguistic competence (Bachman 1990) of the learnt language or they would fail using for example English language as they will not be able to communicate their real intentions without a loss of face (Brown and Levinson, 1978). I agree with the above mentioned theories of Cohen and Schmidt that speech acts and particularly the illocutionary meaning behind them can help language learners in becoming more skilled speakers and avoid them from losing face. I also think that it is important to give the student a chance to make some observations and come to their own conclusions, without telling them what is right or wrong. As Ellis (1998) states let the student be the researcher. This way the students learn to make their own decision based on their own observations of what is appropriate. McConachy (2007) analysed the dialogues which contain speech acts in several English language course books. For example, dialogues which present the speech act of suggestions, but without any contextual information. He suggests that the teacher need to add to these the dialogues by asking questions about the speakers relationship to one and other and asking students to guess any illocutionary information. This asks the students to make their own judgement on the situation and it makes them aware of illocutionary meaning. It seems that speech acts are finding their way into classroom materials (Bardovi-Harlig MayhanTaylor, 2003), but there is still a lot that teachers need to add to make them more comprehensible. At first teaching speech acts it is important to determine the students level of awareness in general by eliciting. Dialogues are useful to show student how speech acts are used, also the evaluation of a situation is a good technique to reinforce the awareness of the learners. Activities such as role plays are good for practicing speech acts. At the end feedback and discussion are useful so students can tell their understanding. Again the idea is to encourage the learner as researcher (Ellis, Bardovi-Harlig et al, 1989) approach and assist students to make their own observations. The most practical implication of speech act theory in teaching is the idea that the literal meaning of the words might not agree with the intended meaning. As I understand speech acts focus on communicative intentions in a language. It is useful for language learners to teach them, because they provide an insight into the study of language as it is used in a social context, and also because they can be applied when learners need to discuss different meanings in a certain context. Bardovi-Harlig Hartford (1997: 114) report that the difference between speech acts and language functions is not always recognised in language teaching, and that the two have a distinct difference. This point might be argued because the study of speech acts comes from the idea that communication is a performance of certain acts, such as making statements, thanking, asking questions, apologizing, complaining and so on (Blum-Kulka, House Kasper 1989: 2). These are functions within a language, which means that speech act theory is about teaching functional units of language with the aim of an understanding of possible illocutionary meaning present. Materials do not always follow this, however there is a progression towards presenting speech acts with contextual information. Teachers need to simplify the speech acts and the sociolinguistic norms around them by breaking them down into easy terms, so the language learners can use them. Although this does not mean it should be separated from the theory. The best way to teach speech acts might be to make students more aware of pragmatic variables and to give them enough information to be able to make their own observations. This allows learners to work out themselves the best way to perform a speech act in any given situation.

Captian Veres reactions to Billy Budd in Billy Budd :: Vere Billy Budd Essays

Captian Vere's reactions to Billy Budd in Billy Budd When Captain Vere says â€Å"Struck dead by an angel of God! Yet the angel must hang!† his attitude towards Billy Budd changes from one of paternal concern and personal respect to one in which he has set aside his personal thoughts and feelings for the sake of his nation. Each sentence represents this dichotomy by indicating his sentiment towards Billy. In the first, Billy is â€Å"an angel of God† who has â€Å"struck† Claggart dead, in a righteous manner. In the second sentence, â€Å"the angel must hang,† indicates that no matter Billy’s intentions or nature, his act is a crime against his country. Vere, between Billy’s outburst and his own divided exclamation, acts maniacally, but methodically. He follows procedure for confirming Claggart’s condition, but does not refer to the event in terms of its secular implications. Instead, he calls it the â€Å"divine judgment on Ananias.† His behavior throughout this passage, which extends for only about a page, is frantic and disturbed. He acts as a â€Å"military disciplinarian† towards the disturbed Billy, ordering him to stay in his stateroom, but when the â€Å"prudent surgeon† enters the room, he acts with haste, interrupting his salute. Yet, when the baffled surgeon confirms Vere’s worst fears, he becomes â€Å"motionless, standing absorbed in thought.† He then convulsively compares Billy to the Angel of Death. Here, Vere is beginning to recognize the consequences of this event, and the necessary actions he must take as captain. Captain Vere returns to his intellectual, patriotic nature, as he becomes again the man whose â€Å"settled convictions were as a dike against those invading waters of novel opinion social, political, and otherwise.† Vere is not one given easily to fits of discomfiture or moral dilemma. He believes strongly in the right of his nation and military, and disciplines himself and his men accordingly. Yet, for the first time we are aware of, Vere becomes torn between his father-like love for Billy and his son-like love for his country.

Iqbal’s Theory of Knowledge Essay

Iqbal cannot be classed under any of the three schools of philosophical thought: the empiricist, the rationalist or the intuitionist. In his theory of knowledge, sense perception, reason and intuition, all are combined in an organic whole. He knew full well that light from one direction alone could not illumine the whole of reality in all its manifestations. The ontological problem needs to be approached from all angles, scientific and religious, in order to secure some articulate, luminous and well-established grounds. It is in the light of this view that he advances his theory of knowledge, which promises both direct evidence and indirect experience of God or Reality—the former by intuition or immediate experience and the latter by reflective thought. Rationalism, though not admired, is not wholly condemned and discarded by him. On the contrary, according to him, if rationalism is not divorced from concrete reality, it represents truth. This is visible from his own attitude and is also betrayed by his admiration for prophets and mystics and non-mystic rationalists, whose quest and yearning for a coherent system of ideas resting on a rational foundation and rendering religion more secure and fruitful is well-known[1]. He admits and justifies the metaphysical methods. In his words, â€Å"Now since the transformation and guidance of man’s inner and outer life is the essential aim of religion, it is obvious that the religious truths which it embodies must not remain unsettled. No one would hazard action on the basis of doubtful principles of conduct. Indeed, in view of its function, religion stands in greater need of rational foundation of its ultimate principles than even the dogmas of science. Science may even ignore a rational metaphysics; indeed it has ignored it so far. Religion can hardly afford to ignore the search for a reconciliation of the opposition of experience and justification of the environment in which humanity finds itself. â€Å"[2] But rationalism, as preached by Iqbal, is not based upon logical categories or mere abstract representations. Born of and nursed in the realism of purely abstract ideas it is not divorced from concrete, reality. It has a definite function to perform which should not, however, be over-emphasised to the detriment of other knowledge-yielding elements—at the expense of sense experience and other sources of knowledge. Thus, while Iqbal embraces rationalism, he is not prepared to justify it at the cost of sense experience. Abstract thinking apart from the latter is of no consequence and even dangerous. He criticises Socrates, Plato, Mu’tazilites and other thinkers for avoiding visible reality as unreliable and misleading. Socrates restricts the field of inquiry to the human problems particularly to morality. â€Å"Trees†, he says, â€Å"can teach me nothing. † Even within the human field he believes knowledge is possible only through concepts. [3] Only reason could give true and ultimate know-ledge; sensation gives only imagination or at the most belief. Plato also accuses sense-perception as capable of giving mere opinion and not real knowledge. He rests all knowledge upon pure reason and weaves the whole fabric of Supreme and Ultimate Reality out of ideas, taken as Eternal and Really Real. This attitude towards sense-perception is not without a parallel in the subsequent thought. Ibn Rushd and Al-Ghazali, the former while defending and the latter while attacking Greek Philosophy, have troddden the same path as far as the avoidance of empirical reality is concerned. Iqbal attacks Ibn Rushd as well as Al-Ghazali. He contends that Ibn Rushd, through his doctrine of Immortality of the Active Intellect, takes a view opposed to what the Qur’an has to say about the value and destiny of the human ego, and thus obscures man’s vision of himself, his God and his world. Similarly, Al-Ghazali’s philosophical scepticism is held by him as an unsafe basis for religion; it is also not wholly justified by the spirit of the Qur’an[4]. All this shows that Iqbal is in favour of taking full congnizance of the visible and concrete reality. He does not encourage man’s contemplative spirit to the extent that it may lead to his withdrawal from the world of matter, which. with its tempora. flux and shifting phenomena, is organically related to Ultimate Reality. Hence, for the purposes of knowledge, it is entirely inconceivable to turn away from the material world and to withdraw into a purely contemplative circuit. There is no possibility of complete separation or independence of thought from concrete experience. On the contrary, one should take his start from here because it is the mental comprehension of the concrete that makes it possible for the intellect of man to pass beyond the concrete. [5] He invites us to take account of and to be fully awake to the material phenomena with all their passing and changing scenes and sights—heaven and earth, sun and stars, clouds and mountains, deserts and oceans. They are the signs of the Ultimate Reality and it is the duty of- one to reflect on these signs and not to pass by them as if one is like the deaf and the blind, for one who does not see these signs in this life will remain blind to the realities of the life to come. [7] They are the manifestations of Divine Effulgence and reflective observation into their ultimate nature reveals the secret of Divine Reality[8]. As a matter of fact, Iqbal takes an eclectic view of the whole question. He preaches neither reason nor sense-perception exclusively. Sensation being a chaotic jumble, upholds Iqbal, cannot lead to knowledge. It is reason that imparts harmony, organisation and coherence to this chaotic jumble and moulds it into a knowledge-yielding pattern. He pleads for reflective observation and scientific experiment. He takes full advantage of modern empirical science, though he never stops short at the visible aspect of Reality as the last word in the realm of existence. The sensible Reality is only a symbol of the Ultimate Reality, and the empirical attitude would bring us into contact with it. Qur’an also takes both the conceptual and non-conceptual attitude towards existence. It recognizes the rationalistic attitude as the cause of the superiority of man over angels, and goes on to say that man has the ability to name things which endows him with the power of capturing them intellectually and thereby rising in the level of existence. But concepts here are not abstract logical entities. They are based on facts of sensation and are indissolubly united with the sensible and observable aspect of Reality. In other words, the knowledge of things is described by Qur’an as the knowledge of names. [9] Again, Qur’an repeatedly invites man to take acount of the physical phenomena. As lqbal puts it, the Qur’an â€Å"sees in the humble be a recipient of Divine Inspiration and constantly calls upon the reader to observe the perpetual change of the winds. the alternation of day and night, the clouds, the starry heavens, and the planets swimming through infinite space†[10]. Iqbal fully agrees with the non-classical attitude of Qur’an and develops his own theory in consonance with it. Qur’an has a place for both metaphysics and empirical sciences. And it is through metaphysical search-light that Iqbal examines scientific researches and develops his own theory. But Iqbal is fully alive to the limitations and short comings of knowledge gained through the normal channels. Firstly, scientific investigation and analytic thought have inherent limitations which are unavoidable. Scientific analysis is never complete and exhaustive in its nature. Reality is an organic whole. Its parts are united by vital internal connections. This underlying relationship confers a wholeness in the diversities and pluralities. Analysis would select a part of reality which, when taken apart, would become lifeless, shorn of the qualities it has by virtue of its integral position within a whole. It is rendered meaningless apart from its relations, as a part separated from its pattern, a single dot or line taken out from the whole picture. Besides, analysis because of the immense complexity of its object can never attain ideal completeness. The ideal analysis involves the description of all the constitutive elements of a subject. It fails if any single element escapes notice or the units reached in the process are not ultimate. However, such an ideal cannot be accomplished, hampered as we are by our limitations. If we go a step further we find that the defect of analysis would also distort synthesis which is based upon it. In synthesis those elements only are combined that are discovered in the process of analysis. Thus the incompleteness of analysis results in the incompleteness of synthesis. It is obvious that an object discovered in this manner is not what it actually is but merely what it is mentally cons-trued. Even if the completeness of analysis is taken for granted, what we cannot afford to overlook is the importance of the vital inner connections underlying the whole reality, which are lost through the analytic procedure. Spaulding, who believes that the whole is nothing but â€Å"the parts and their properties and the relations relating the parts and the possibly specific properties of the whole,†[11] has tried to remedy this defect of analysis. He asserts that the knowledge of the parts when accompanied with the knowledge of their relations could give the knowledge of the whole. This assertion carries some truth in the mechanical realm but is futile in its application to the knowledge of an organic whole. The properties of the whole can be known from the observation of the behaviour of the whole as a whole; analysis does not disclose them. â€Å"‘[12] Iqbal has kept this fact in view and does not over-emphasise the role of the analytic method, though he assigns to it a legitimate place in the practical domain. According to him, empirical sciences give a sectional and fragmentary knowledge of reality which, though trust worthy, verifiable and even useful so far as the prediction and con trol of events of nature go, does not explain Ultimate Reality in its entirety. Glorify as they do in an artificial, selective and sectional process which uses concepts relatively applicable to different levels of experience, they fail to give the complete view of Reality. [13] It is an irony that our analytic thought first puts a veil on the face of Reality[14] and then endeavours to penetrate through it. Its path is zigzag and intricate; its approach and progress are gradual and slow. [15] Yet another difficulty besets the knowledge of ultimate reality. The subjective element, as the constituent element in the sensible Reality, has rendered the really Real unknowable. Kant goes so far as to reduce even space and time to subjective modes or forms of apprehending Reality; they are no more objective realities, empirical concepts or outward intuitions. They are merely the constructions or forms of inner sense, the necessary a -priori representations under-lying all outer intuitions. [16] The manifold of senses when it reaches us, has lost its purity; in order to reach us it has to fulfil the formal conditions and is bound to pass through the coloured glasses of space and time. â€Å"The thing in itself is only the limiting idea. Its function is merely regulative. If there is some actuality corresponding to the idea it falls outside the boundaries of experience and consequently its existence cannot be rationally demonstrated. â€Å"[17] Iqbal also believes that serial time and space are subjective and not objective realities. [18] But he disagrees with Kant in so far as the acquisition of the knowledge of Ultimate Reality is concerned. The Ultimate Reality lies outside the normal level of experience, inaccessible to sense-perception and pure reason. But the normal level is not the only knowledge-yielding level. [19] Though Iqbal is convinced that serial time and space ate subjective, he departs from the view that they are the final and inflexible mental forms determining and limiting all knowledge. He takes the view that our intuitive experience is not determined and systematised by space and time. When we dive within our own self and pass from sense-perception to intuition of the self, we perceive Reality, not as a concept or intellectual onstruction, not as a solid block or substratum underlying or holding together all experience, but as a dynamic and creative flow living in pure duration in which time is divested of spatiality and appears in its organic wholeness. However, it is no less true that this stage is attainable only through profound meditation, when the appreciative self gets the upper hand and all its potentialities are unfolded. It is now that the psychological experience expands into the intuition of Ultimate Rea lity—God. It discloses Ultimate Reality as a flux, a dynamic and creative flow that involves a progressive synthesis of various stages, in which life, thought and purpose all interpenetrate to form an organic whole. [20] Iqbal identifies intuition or immediate experience with love. Intuition or love would unfold to him new spheres of illumination, wherein unroll vistas of Reality comprehending Divine Presence itself. In contrast, the knowledge yielded by intellect is sectional, piece-meat and fragmentary because it is involved in the labyrinth of space and time. The knowledge through intuition is not imparted partially and byinnuendo. It is grounded in the deeper and higher self of man. It is incorporeal and eternal and leads directly to the incorporeal and the eternal. [21] Knowledge through love or intuition means knowledge through the heart, wherein we have change but no succession, pure duration but no serial time. [22] It comes with a surer step, has a higher and more profound air of authority about it and is born out of direct and immediate luminousness. But it should not be construed that intuition is antagonistic to analytic thought or intellect. Love and intellect both aim at the knowledge of reality and differ only in the courses they adopt. The intellect grasps and views certain parts of reality as abstracted from the whole; it gives only the temporal aspect of reality. Intuition reveals the reality in its wholeness and fulness. It is the method which takes things as a whole without waiting for analysis. Through a comprehensive grasp it gives the deepest truth. It forms that point of vantage which affords a perspective of the whole domain of Reality. Rather, it is the gateway at which Truth and Reality â€Å"rap and knock and enter our soul. Intuition and intellect together may be visualised as a double-edged sword in man’s hand. With one edge he invades the Ultimate Reality; with file other he invades the Universe. In other words, the ego has two eyes: with one eye he sees and approaches the inner and invisible Reality, with the other, the visible Reality. If the ego sees with one eye, it commits a great sin; if i t uses both eyes it reaches its destination. [23] Neither of them constitutes the exhaustive method or the only road to truth. Both should be employed and potentiated in the pursuit of exhaustive knowledge. They have a common source and are complementary to each other. Intuition is only a higher developmental state of intellect, and in order to view Reality as a whole it is necessary that we supplement intuition with intellect. [24] Intellect, when it is fused with love, becomes, as it were, illuminated by Divine Light; similarly, love when buttressed by intellect becomes more powerful and potent. [25] Knowledge based entirely upon reason and intellect, the intricate labyrinth of abstract reasoning, can lead to that articulation of beliefs which constitutes proof and demonstrated knowledge. But unless intellect is supplemented with intuition, this knowledge would become narrow, partial and lifeless and would lead to stagnation and pedantry. Intuition is its life and spirit; it is its â€Å"ruh ul-qudus† without which it would be reduced to a mere magic show, too impotent and crippled to lead us on to fruitful results. [26] Intellect, if not guided by love, becomes devilish or satanic—an evil force. It generates darkness and leads the world to blind power, chaos and destruction. Unanimated by love it is dead and lifeless, and its arrow, unguided as it is, flies without aim. 27] Let it be quickened and guided by intuition, love, yearning, and it shall yield knowledge par excellence—good, rounded and indispensable knowledge—knowledge which is power, encompassing heaven and deriving light from the stars, which contains the description of the whole existence and to which is related the destiny of the whole of existence. Intellect infused with intu ition gives celestial and divine knowledge. [28] Intuition or love is thus the very law of life and regulative power. It expands and enriches personality, and confers vision. At the same time, it is corrective of intellect and abstract thought, of science and common sense. If the above analysis is correct, the unqualified dismissal of the role of intuition or love in the achievement of knowledge as unscientific by the apostles of reason would appear to be highly unreasonable. Though intuition is a mode of dealing with Reality in which sense-perception has no part to play, yet it gives knowledge, which is as concrete as that yielded by any other experience. [29] Intuition has its peculiar characteristics which differentiate it from intellect and sense-perception. They can be enumerated as follows: 1. It gives the direct and immediate experience of Aboslute Reality or God. â€Å"God is not a mathematical entity or a system of concepts mutually related to one another and having no reference to experience. [30] Intuition gives the experience of God as sense-experience gives the experience of perceptible reality. And as regions of normal experience are subject to interpretation of sense-data for our knowledge of the external world, so the region of mystic experience is subject to interpretation for our knowledge of God. [31] 2. Mystic experience is characterised with un-analysable wholeness.  It gives reality as an indivisible organic unity, not as broken segments with many missing links. The reason is that it does not entangle itself in a sectional treatment of reality, which would allow only a selective study of certain parts of its visible aspects. This modus operandi is the de-light of rational consciousness, which specialises in analysis and synthesis as dictated by the practical needs of adaptation to our environment. [32] As for example, out of the innumerable sense-data in a room, our rational consciousness selects only that which on synthesis would yield us the single experience of a table. 33]In mystic experience which includes the cognitive element in its minimum degree, there is no possibility of such analysis. It is unique in so far as it ranges beyond these frontiers and brings us into contact with the total passage of reality, in which all the diverse stimuli run into one another forming a single un-analysable unity, and in which the ordinary distinctness of subject and object does not exist. [34]But we should not run away with the idea that mystic experience is some â€Å"mysterious faculty†[35] having no continuity with ordinary consciousness, as maintained by William James. 3. God or Ultimate and Perfect Reality is both immanent and transcendent. He not only permeates and encompasses the universe but also His domain rolls beyond it. He is the unique Other Self that transcends and encompasses the private personality of the finite individual Self. Mystic experience brings the mystic into direct communion with God, â€Å"momentarily suppressing†[36] his own individuality. He is for the time being submerged in Supreme Reality and loses consciousness of himself as a distinct and private personality. But he emerges from his experience all the richer for in this brief moment of intimate association with God he has perceived Him as an Independent Other Self and as a Concrete Individual. It is, therefore, erroneous to presume that the mystic state is â€Å"a mere retirement into the mists of pure subjectivity. â€Å"[37] Far from being so the contents of this experience are as objective as the knowledge yielded by an ordinary social experience. This may sound strange because we tend to believe that all objective experience must necessarily stem from sense-perception. But it is an extremely fallacious view. For, if it were true, we could never be sure of the reality of our social experience in so far as we know others as conscious beings. Granted that the knowledge of visible reality is based on sense-perception. granted also that the knowledge of our own inner and outer self is based on inner reflection and sense-perception, but when it comes to the knowledge of other conscious beings as such we are undergoing immediate experience—we are inferring the existence of a similar consciousness in them on the analogy of our own emotional states, which are exhibited by the two of us by similar physical movements. We do not tarry to work out or belabour the analogy in our daily lives; but the knowledge that the individual before us is a conscious being floods our mind as an immediate experience, which is further supplemented by his response to our signals a fact which gives completeness to our fragmentary meanings. We never entertain any doubt about the validity of this knowledge because of its inferential quality. In the ultimate analysis the mystic and the social experience are parallel to each other; and they- therefore belong to the same category. 4. The mystic experience is direct and immediate and hence does not lend itself to communication as such. it is feeling rather than thought, but like all other feelings it has a thought element which gives it direction and shapes it into an idea. it has two aspects: non-temporal and temporal. The non-temporal aspect is feeling, whereas the temporal aspect is idea. The non-temporal aspect is also not without a sense of direction. Feeling is outward-pushing as idea is outward-reporting.  Feeling is ever directed towards something that is feeling, some objective which transforms its characteristic instability into stability. It gives the direct vision of reality, But mystic experience, untouched as it is by discursive intellect, would not lend itself to transmission in logical forms. Nevertheless it seeks expression in thought and can be conveyed as interpreted by the prophet or the mystic who has experienced it. [39] 5. The mystic eperience reveals Reality as an eternal whole unbounded by past and future, as a single eternal now. nd establishes the unreality of the serial character of space and establishes the unreality of the serial character of space and time. But this state does not abide. It gives the vision of reality and soon fades away leaving a sense of authority behind it. [40] â€Å"Both the mystic and prophet return to the normal levels of experience; but with this difference that the return of the prophet may be fraught with infinite meaning for mankind. â€Å"[41] The path to intuition, according to Iqbal, lies through religion. The intuition of the self as a psychological experience is approach-able to all even at the normal level. But the higher intuition or the intuition of God is achieved gradually through a definite course only as the religious consciousness expands in intensity and richness. It consists of three stages, faith, thought and discovery. The first is the period when the individual, through his adherence to the unconditional command, cultivates self-discipline. Here we have the undemurring surrender to Divine Law without the interference of reason or logical demonstration. It enables man to find his niche in the set-up of political and social life. But so far as the evolution of man’s inner self is concerned it is of no consequence. This stage leads to the next where reason and rational understanding manifest themselves as the source and ground of the authority of discipline, thus basing religion on metaphysics or philosophy. This is followed by the third and highest stage where philosophy gives place to psychology and the individual develops a yearning to attain direct contact with Divine Reality. It is here that religion becomes a matter of assimilation of life and power; and the individual achieves a free personality, not by releasing himself from the fetters of the law, but by discovering the ultimate source of the law within the depths of his own consciousness†. [42] The Book is not imposed as something external but is revealed to a prophet. It is the period of discovery or intuition. â€Å"The climax of religious life, however, is the discovery of the ego as an individual deeper than his conceptually describable habitual self-hood. It is in contact with the Most Real that the ego discovers its uniqueness, its metaphysical status and the possibility of improvement in that status. Strictly speaking, the experience which leads to this discovery is not a conceptually manageable intellectual fact: it is a vital fact, an attitude consequent on an inner biological transformation which cannot be captured in the net of logical categories. It can embody itself only in a world-making or world-shaking act; and in this form alone the content of this timeless experience can diffuse itself in the time-movement, and make itself effectively visible to the eye of history. It seems that the method of dealing with Reality by means of concepts is not at all a serious way of dealing with it. Science does not care whether its electron is a real entity or not. It may be a mere symbol, a mere convention. Religion, which is essentially a mode of actual living, is the only serious way of handling Reality. â€Å"[43] Science deals with concepts, factual reality or the â€Å"causality-bound aspect of nature†, but the physical, sensible and external causality-bound aspect of nature does not exhaust the realm of Reality. The other aspect of reality is not less important than the visible one. It invades consciousness from another direction. untouched by rational thought dealing with the optically present universe. This broad path can be opened through religion only, because religion concerns itself with deed, which is the outcome of the constant attitude of man’s whole personality or structure to reality. The deed, â€Å"i. e. the control of man’s physiological and psychological processes†, is dynamically related to reality and prepares the finite self for immediate association with Infinite Ego. [44] Hence, religion, as lqbal would have it, is not a mere collection of dogmas or theological formulae: â€Å"Conservatism is as bad in religion as in any other department of human activity. It destroys the ego’s creative freedom and closes up the paths of fresh spiritual enterprise. â€Å"[45]Religion in its highest manifestation does not imply the life-denying and fact-avoiding attitude. It does not work as an external imposition on the free and spontaneous expression of human personality. On the contrary, it is the open sesame to fresh and mere fruitful directions to communicate with the Ultimately Real. It awakens and actualizes the level lying close to the normal level, directing one’s vision to the inner side of the self. It regenerates the inner powers and possibilities of the human self. It expands and enriches the fields of human thought and emotion. It unlocks fresh spiritual sources. During this period man gets the power to overcome his intellectual reconstruction and to penetrate the crust of causal sequence and spatio-temporal manifold. He comes into contact with the everlasting and eternal source of life and power. Here we have a picture of Iqbal’s theory of knowledge in which he endeavours to give us a clue to the Ultimate Reality. Whether the perfect knowledge of the actual and The Ultimate Reality, of the final nature and essence of things is possible is a very subtle question. Iqbal’s answer to it is an unhesitating, bold and optimistic affirmation. Reality can be known, grasped and comprehended not only in its partial and fragmentary aspect but also in its completeness. The great merit and virtue of his theory lies in the fact that he does not adopt and exalt any one method at the cost of the others.

How Literature Mirrors the Era Essay examples - 513 Words

How Literature Mirrors the Era Beowulf, Macbeth, Eaters of the Dead, The Canterbury Tales, The Merchant of Venice, and Paradise Lost all reflect the time eras in which each was written. Each of which era reflects a totally different outlook on life. The Anglo-Saxon era was focused on blood, war, tragedy, heroism, and evilness. William the Conquerer was making his invasions around the world; this set the world to attention, making war and violence a common spectacle. Beowulf is one of the oldest known literary records of the beginnings of the English language. Beowulf is about a warrior who engages in a quest to help King Rothgar defeat a monster named Grendel. Throughout the whole story Beowulf is on a mission to destroy†¦show more content†¦Macbeth’s conscience thoughout the play is trying to cope with the horrendous deeds he has done. The play ends with a war between Macbeth and Macduff. Macbeth is a mirror of the Anglo-Saxon era because of all the murders in the play, Macbeth murders people when they get in his way of earning what he thinks he deserves, such as the King and Banquo. The war at the end of the play shows how if someone in the Anglo-Saxon time period won a battle they were looked upon a god-like and very heroic. Michael Crichton’s Eaters of the Dead, is about Viking adventures and invasions. The Vikings were almost barbaric in their ways, they set out to destroy towns and crush life. They killed anyone who gave them any trouble and they were always engaged in war. This story reflects Anglo-Saxon times in that there was always war, and many invasions during that time. Everyone at that time was very violent especially the men, Eaters of the Dead is a very good example of what the Anlgo-Saxon times might have been like. The Middle Ages was a time when people focused their life on the church, and the revival of their spirit. It was also a time when the church had very corrupt ways. Geoffery Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, pokes fun of the corrupt churches. In the prologue of the Canterbury Tales Chaucer describes each character in his story. When it comes to the church associated characters ChaucerShow MoreRelatedThe Lady Of Shalott By Tennyson And Goblin Market1464 Words   |  6 PagesThe Victorian age is a challenging era to outline. There was a handful of reasons on why it was such a challenging time. One of the main problematic topics was gender roles being very controversial. Men were looked at being intelligent and the leader of the family while women were the ones to care for the children and keep up on the domestic duties. While there were many women that accepted the typical gender roles, there were many women that were not accepting. In both poem, â€Å"The Lady of Shalott† Read MoreSymbolism Of Rain In Ernest Hemingways A Farewell To Arms1246 Words   |  5 Pageschange of weather and physical setting play an important role in the emotional changing of the book itself. Due to the time period in which A Farewell to Arms was written and the themes used, Hemingway is known to be a writer of the modernism literary era, which was characterized by the frailty, disbelief, and eventual brokenness felt following World War 1. When Frederic Henry physically changes location, there is a shift in the book as well, in terms of the tone and mood, typically to one of increasedRead MoreInfluences of the Romantic Period1575 Words   |  7 Pagesindividual heroism. This style contrasted the then prevalent classical forms of literature such as the French Neoclassical Tragedy. But this new emotional literary expression would be a key part of literature during the Romantic Era (Britannica). Literature during the Romantic Era was influenced by politics and major historica l events and social reforms, religion, science, economics, and art and music. Literature of the Romantic Era was heavily influenced by the politics, major events and social reformsRead MoreWilliam Gulliver s Travels And Oroonoko1687 Words   |  7 Pagesmid-1600s and late-1700s, a literary genre defined by artificiality and formality, neoclassical literature reflected the style of literature adopted from the Greeks and the Romans. As such, the literature tends to focus on glib characters who were preoccupied with appearances rather than genuineness. In addition, having good manners and public comportment was essential. The literature during the Neoclassical era is characterized by structure, order, and accuracy, traits that directly undermined attitudesRead MoreThe Fairy Tales Bear Negative And Repulsive Traits, Such As Vanity, Jealousy And Pride1151 Words   |  5 Pagesthe stepmother has also become a scapegoat, a terrifying figure who goes against all the expectations of women and motherhood, but who is nevertheless herself a victim of the situation and the society she finds herself in. Most of the children literature deal with the fight between good and evil. with constantly supporting the good characters we often forget to take a look at the evil creatures in the story. We often talk about witches who want to hurt the princess. The witch in fairy tales representsRead MoreEssay on Historical People from the Victorian Era876 Words   |  4 PagesThe Victorian Era The Victorian era was when Queen Victoria ruled England from 1837 to 1901. This was a time when it culturally changed from rationalism from the prior era (Georgian period) toward â€Å"romanticism and mysticism with regard to religion, social values, and arts.† This was also a time of peace in international relationships and economic, colonial and industrial growth. The two most important in politics were the prime ministers Gladstone and Disraeli. Gladstone was a liberal and DisraeliRead MoreThe King Of Gothic Literature1321 Words   |  6 Pages2015 The King of Gothic Gothic literature is an new, and young concept to many. It barely popped it’s head out in the mere eighteen hundreds. One of those who well mastered the concept of this was Stephen King. Stephen King was able to wrap his mind around the topic, and bend it to his will. By today’s date, Stephen King has already based some of his best works of art, of horror literature, with the fusion of gothic elements and today’s horror. Gothic literature can be defined as writing that employsRead MoreShort Essay On Guy De Maupassant767 Words   |  4 Pageshealth problem. He died at the age of forty-two alone in a mental institution. No doubt his literature will not be forgotten they embraced realism and affection. His writing belonged to the genre of naturalism. He has written more than 300 short stories, six novels, travel books and also a book of poetry. (TFP) When his parents separated at eleven he lived with his mother whom was devoted to classical literature. In 1870 the French Prussian war broke out Maupassant had gone to Paris to study law, enlistedRead MoreThe Tragedy Of The Greek Tragedy912 Words   |  4 PagesGreat Tragedy Results in Deeper thinking Throughout the history of ancient literature, tragedy was one of the most famous and significant literary forms. Especially, Greek tragedy literature was a popular and influential form of drama performed in theatres across ancient Greece from the late 6th century BCE, and formed the foundation upon which all modern theatre is based (Cartwright). I will look for not only the reasons why Greek writers composed such tragedy, but also focus on what made the audienceRead More To what extent is Frankenstein typical of gothic literature?1272 Words   |  6 PagesTo what extent is Frankenstein typical of gothic literature? In you answer make close references to its context and Mary Shellys use of language. This essay will assess how typical of the gothic genre writings is Mary Shellys Frankenstein. The novel was written at a time when electricity was first discovered and Galvanism was being explored, mainly for medical reasons. People at this time were ignorant and sceptical of medicine and so most people would have been disgusted by these studies