0
What else can I help you with?
Why did robin hood's cousin kill him?
Its one of those situations where people just have to place blame. Robin was feeling sick and went to his cousin (a nun) to have her bleed him. It was a common (if misconceived) notion that bleeding a person let the bad spirits out. So when Robin became sick to death people started placing blame as they usually do and the unfortunate cousin and her nunnery became the target of Little John for vengeance. Fortunately, Robin (even though he was dying) had a leveler head and spared them, distracting Little John with a complex means of getting him buried.
What is rasicim?
Racism is prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior. It can manifest in various forms, such as systemic racism, institutional racism, or individual acts of prejudice. Racism undermines social cohesion and perpetuates inequality and injustice.
Implications of radical criminology on crime policy?
Before discussing radical criminology and its implications of crime policies, it is first necessary to define radical criminology but before doing so, let us begin with defining criminology itself. Criminology is a theoretical field of study that endeavors to to discern the root causes of crime, what crime means in terms of law, and the populaces reaction to crime in general. Criminology, being an offshoot of sociology, tends to embrace Marxist idealism and radical criminology, also known as conflict theory, wholly embraces Marxism as an answer towards dealing with crime. The notion that criminal behavior and the criminals that engage in such behavior need to be studied in order to better develop policies in dealing with crime is a very modern practice. Indeed, it is a product of a post Marxist world. Radical criminology or conflict theory is based on the belief that crime is directly caused by the social and economic forces of any given society. In criminology this view is taken as well but in radical criminology the belief is that the justice system exists primarily to serve the wealthy and oppress the poor. There is no doubt some validity to the idea that social and economic forces contribute greatly to crime. In fact, Victor Hugo's outstanding novel Les Miserables presents an epic tale of Jean Valjean, a man who when very young stole a loaf of bread to feed his destitute family and found himself imprisoned for many years because of this. That action, one of theft, no doubt a crime, set forth a series of events that inspired Valjean to endeavor to repent his crime and do penance. Upon his release, having nowhere to stay he is welcomed into the home of the local priest who feeds him and offers him lodging for the night. Later that night, Valjean steals some silverware and other such items of value and steals away in the night. He is soon captured and claiming the priest gave these items of value to him as a gift he is brought back to the priests home so the gendarmes may verify this story. To Valjeans great surprise, the priest testifies he did indeed give the items Valjean stole and demands the gendarmes let him go. Upon doing so, the priest demands of Jean Valjean a price. That price is that Valjean endeavor to live a life without sin and to be a better man. Valjean does so, and in doing so rises up in the social order to a standing of wealth and respect only to find himself hounded by a gendarme who recognizes him from his days in prison. This tome of tremendous scope and length is the conflict between these two men, Valjean the former thief and the gendarme Javert. While Valjean who began as a thief stands as the iconic hero of the ages, moral and upright in his character, Javert as the lawman stands as the amoral opportunist and villain. This portrayal of a moral thief who is hounded by an amoral officer of the law is wholly plausible and the book is well worth reading. However, to use it as the perfect model and example of how societies are and tend to be is not such a good policy. The law, is nothing if it is not a collective organization of the individuals right to self defense. In other words, the law is that which defends the natural rights of the individual. The only reason to organize a system that would dispense justice is in defense of the individuals right to life, liberty and the pursuit of property. When the law or justice functions in this capacity then it follows that if an individual does not have the right to use force against a persons liberty, life or property then the organization founded on this principle has no right to use force against a persons lawful right to life, liberty and property. When the law moves beyond this scope we find ourselves in a society that suffers from social injustice. It is not because there are wealthy and poor that there is social injustice but because there is a perversion of law. There will be anomalous situations such as Jean Valjean who while noble and good commits the crime of theft in order to survive, but let's be honest about the "social justice" of France during that countries tumultuous revolutionary period of 1815 to 1835 is hardly known historically as a time of social peace and justice. Those revolutions began because of an aristocracy who gleefully plundered the people and got even bloodier because the people plundered back. Plunder, whether it be through illegal or "legal" means is plunder and as such a crime. There is no justification for plunder and a criminal policy based on the Marxist principles of legal plunder will never bring about a just society. Only when the people endeavor to organize a system of justice that protects the rights of the individual to live free from harm from others, and most importantly from the tyranny of governments will a just society have a chance of surviving. Any other form of organization is surely breeding grounds for injustice.
Can you give me a piece of the unpardonable crime?
"The Unpardonable Crime" Only one living creature seemed to take any notice of his existence: this was an old St. Bernard, who used to come and lay his big head with its mournful eyes on Christophe's knees when Christophe was sitting on the seat in front of the house. They would look long at each other. Christophe would not drive him away Unlike the sick Goethe, the dog's eyes had no uneasiness for him Unlike him, he had no desire to cry: "Go away! . . . Thou goblin thou shalt not catch me, whatever thou doest!" He asked nothing better than to be engrossed by the dog's suppliant sleepy eyes and to help the beast: he felt that there must be behind them an imprisoned soul imploring his aid. In those hours when he was weak with suffering, torn alive away from life, devoid of human egoism, he saw the victims of men, the field of battle in which man triumphed in the bloody slaughter of all other creatures: and his heart was filled with pity and horror. Even in the days when he had been happy he had always loved the beasts: he had never been able to bear cruelty towards them: he had always had a detestation of sport, which he had never dared to express for fear of ridicule: but his feeling of repulsion had been the secret cause of the apparently inexplicable feeling of dislike he had had for certain men: he had never been able to admit to his friendship a man who could kill an animal for pleasure. It was not sentimentality: no one knew better than he that life is based on suffering and infinite cruelty: no man can live without making others suffer. It is no use closing our eyes and fobbing ourselves off with words. It is no use either coming to the conclusion that we must renounce life and sniveling like children. No. We must kill to live, if, at the time, there is no other means of living. But the man who kills for the sake of killing is a miscreant. An unconscious miscreant, I know. But, all the same, a miscreant. The continual endeavor of man should be to lessen the sum of suffering and cruelty: that is the first duty of humanity. In ordinary life those ideas remained buried in Christophe's inmost heart. He refused to think of them. What was the good? What could he do? He had to be Christophe, he had to accomplish his work, live at all costs, live at the cost of the weak. ... It was not he who had made the universe. . . . Better not think of it, better not think of it. ... But when unhappiness had dragged him down, him, too, to the level of the vanquished, he had to think of these things. Only a little while ago he had blamed Olivier for plunging into futile remorse and vain compassion for all the wretchedness that men suffer and inflict. Now he went even farther: with all the vehemence of his mighty nature he probed to the depths of the tragedy of the universe: he suffered all the sufferings of the world, and was left raw and bleeding. He could not think of the animals without shuddering in anguish. He looked into the eyes of the beasts and saw there a soul like his own, a soul which could not speak: but the eyes cried for it: "What have I done to you? Why do you hurt me?" He could not bear to see the most ordinary sights that he had seen hundreds of times ---a calf crying in a wicker pen, with its big, protruding eyes, with their bluish whites and pink lids, and white lashes, its curly white tufts on its forehead, its purple snout, its knock-kneed legs:---a lamb being carried by a peasant with its four legs tied together, hanging head down, trying to hold its head up, moaning like a child, bleating and lolling its gray tongue:---fowls huddled together in a basket:---the distant squeals of a pig being bled to death:---a fish being cleaned on the kitchen-table. . . . The nameless tortures which men inflict on such innocent creatures made his heart ache. Grant animals a ray of reason, imagine what a frightful nightmare the world is to them: a dream of cold-blooded men, blind and deaf, cutting their throats, slitting them open, gutting them, cutting them into pieces, cooking them alive, sometimes laughing at them and their contortions as they writhe in agony. Is there anything more atrocious among the cannibals of Africa? To a man whose mind is free there is something even more intolerable in the sufferings of animals than in the sufferings of men. For with the latter it is at least admitted that suffering is evil and that the man who causes it is a criminal. But thousands of animals are uselessly butchered every day without a shadow of remorse. If any man were to refer to it, he would be thought ridiculous.---And that is the unpardonable crime. That alone is the justification of all that men may suffer. It cries vengeance upon God. If there exists a good God, then even the most humble of living things must be saved. If God is good only to the strong, if there is no justice for the weak and lowly, for the poor creatures who are offered up as a sacrifice to humanity, then there is no such thing as goodness, no such thing as justice.
How does a sociological view of deviance differ from the commonsense notion that bad people do bad things?
A sociological view of deviance considers deviant behavior as a product of social contexts and interactions, rather than inherent traits of individuals. It focuses on how norms, values, and power dynamics in society shape what is considered deviant. In contrast, the commonsense notion simplifies deviance as solely the result of individual choices and characteristics, failing to account for broader social influences.
How does the Indian notion of self differ from the western notion?
The Indian notion of self is often rooted in a collective consciousness where the individual is seen as interconnected with others and the universe, emphasizing harmony and balance. In contrast, the Western notion of self tends to prioritize individualism and autonomy, valuing personal identity, achievement, and independence.
How do you say notion in french?
"Notion" in French is... "Notion".
What is the most common system of number notion used in today's world?
base-10 number system
Is notion an adjective?
No, the word notion is a noun, a singular common noun. The singular noun notion is an abstract noun as a word for a conception of or belief about something; a sudden wish or desire. The plural noun notions is a concrete noun as a word for small useful articles (as pins, needles, or thread).
What best describes the term common notion?
A common notion refers to a shared understanding or belief that is widely accepted within a specific group or culture. It is often an idea that is continuously reinforced and ingrained in society through various means such as education, media, or tradition. Common notions serve as a foundation for how individuals perceive and interact with the world around them.
Can you make me a sentence using the word notion?
Where on earth would you get such a notion?
What is the notion of the Blackfeet?
The notion of the Blackfeet is similar like today's notion
What is another word for notion?
A notion is a thought, idea, or impulse.
Can you put the word notion in a sentence?
I have a notion that a lot of people come on here asking for example sentences because they don't want to do their own homework. Notion is an older word for idea.
How many syllables are in the word notion?
The word notion has two syllables. (no-tion)
When was Kill Your Timid Notion created?
Kill Your Timid Notion was created in 2003.
