Leonardo da Vinci was commissioned to paint the Last Supper. He spent three years working on the large painting, using the accounts of the event found in the four Gospels. The painting is a snap shot of the moment after Jesus tells his disciples that one of them will betray him. Da Vinci’s skill is evident in the incredibly life like depictions of each person, the usage of space, and his ability to draw the eye to the focal point of Jesus Christ. Through the years the painting has gained popularity for more than its artistic accomplishments. The use of symbolism has led to increasing controversial theories.

The actual story of the Last Supper is filled with symbolism. It was the Passover meal and Jesus is the sacrificial lamb. He uses bread to symbolize his body. The bread is broken and given to be shared, just as his body will be broken and his life given up for others. He uses the wine to represent his blood. It is similarly poured out and shared. There is not much controversy over the use of symbols within the biblical account. However, the depiction of this important moment leads many to see different realities. Symbolism in The Last Supper begins with the beliefs of the viewer and results in theories about what really happened and why.

One of the most controversial discussions regarding Leonardo’s use of symbolism focuses on the person sitting to the right of Jesus. The historical account has this person listed as the Apostle John. However, the feminine face has led many to believe it is Mary Magdalen. This theory, of course, leads to discussions of her place in Jesus’ life. There are many that believe she is actually more than his disciple, that she is his wife and the mother of his children. Their dress and positioning of their bodies combine with her role in the life of Jesus to build this idea. The curiosity concerning the lack the Holy Grail in The Last Supper has added to the theory regarding Mary Magdalen. It is believed that she is actually the Holy Grail, or chalice, which holds the blood of Jesus. The followers of this reasoning believe she held his blood, or continued his bloodline, by bearing his children.

There are other symbols that seem to have different meanings. For instance, the hand holding a knife is mainly believed to be that of Peter as he prepares to defend Jesus from the betrayer. However, there is also the thought that da Vinci is making a statement about the Church and how he believed it would use any means necessary to control opposition.

Leonardo da Vinci is known for his fascinating mind and exceptional artistic abilities. Both of these qualities come together in The Last Supper, bringing vision to the faithful and controversy to the questioning. The Last Supper is a beautifully painted representation of Scripture to the Christian believer. The painting is also viewed as proof that Leonardo da Vinci knew hidden truths. The Last Supper is filled with symbolism that feeds both faith and doubt and is an example of the ultimate battle.

Women were often placed in arranged agreements to marry as early as the age of eight years old. A woman in the Renaissance usually got married somewhere between the ages of sixteen and twenty years old. Marriages were arranged not for reasons of romantic love, but for business reasons, in the interest of trade relations, and sometimes to make or maintain peace between families. Women married at a young age in order to increase the chances of producing as many heirs as possible. A woman would have a dowry, or gift presented to her husband, at the time of her marriage. A dowry could be anything from a monetary sum to livestock for her husband’s farm. A woman would also carry all her belongings in a special trunk, called a cassoni, that would be presented to her husband. Women were treated as mere decorations in public; they were often seen as no more than a prize around a man’s arm in order to increase his social standing among his peers.

Contributing to the Renaissance view of the woman as a prize to be claimed, on the day of her wedding, she was often paraded about town by her husband. If a woman did not marry, she would often be sent to a convent to become a nun, living her life in chaste service to God.

Over the course of her marriage, a woman of the Renaissance period would bear between five to ten children. After childbirth, there would be a “laying in”– the equivalent to a modern-day baby shower. The average Renaissance woman would need all the gifts she could get, for the work of caring for and raising the children was left solely to her.

In addition to the duties of raising a family, women in the Renaissance were also responsible for making and repairing most of the family’s clothes from scratch, by hand. They would also do all the cooking and preparation of meals for the entire family. Most women would never hold any occupation other than “housewife”.

Some women were permitted to work small jobs as leather workers, fabric merchants, or as assistants to bakers. In rare cases, the wife of a merchant would take over her husband’s position and duties after he died. This didn’t put the woman on equal footing, however; women were paid much less than a man doing the same type of job. Even a Renaissance merchant woman was expected to remain silent unless spoken to, avoid all discussions of religion or politics, and to attend to the duties of their husbands’ business and household.

Why were women of the Renaissance period treated this way? Prominent theologians of the time pointed to the story in the Bible of Adam and Eve, the first man and woman created by God. According to the story, Eve was responsible for tempting Adam to eat fruit from the Tree of Knowledge, an act that had been forbidden by God Himself. When Adam succumbed to Eve’s temptation, clergy said, he tainted humankind forever after with the stain of “Original Sin”. Thus, all women were seen as weak and foolish. This characterization lead most men of the time to regard women as mysterious at best, and untrustworthy at worst.

Indian culture is an amalgam of numerous traditions, beliefs and practices. It is based on a strict social hierarchy. The Indian society is highly family centric. It is very important for Indians to strike the right balance between their career and their home. Be it a man or a woman, the metric of success for both is more or less decided by these two factors. Money and property may define one’s success in the Indian society, but they are not the only things that make an Indian successful. It is considered important for Indian men to have a prestigious job, with a good salary and a respectable status in the society. For Indian women it is more important to be married at the right age, to the right person and in the right family. Although with the changing times and the increasing importance of education among Indians, having a great career is becoming more and more important for Indian women.

The Indian society can be further classified into the urban and the rural communities. Among the rural people the definition of success is absolutely different from that of the urban people. In most rural families the concept of individual success is not very popular. The head of the family is the main earning member and his position in the society indicates how successful his family is, as a whole. While the success of the male member of the family is rated by his ability to provide for his kin, the success of a woman is measured by how well she runs the house and takes care of her children.

In the Urban Indian society the emphasis on career progression is catching up fast. But the essence of the Indian traditions and cultural values has not lost its significance among the modern Indians as well. Like in most other societies, the Indian people believe in getting the best of both worlds. Their idea of a great life is to have a perfect family and a perfect career. Both Indian men are women are venturing into creative career fields matching their interests and capabilities. Having a satisfying career, which pays well and earns them good reputation in the society, defines success for the urban Indians.

Relationships are considered very important in the Indian culture. Respecting one’s elders and valuing one’s parents is expected out of every Indian. Also, it’s a norm for the Indian people to get married by a certain age. For Indians, marrying late or not getting married at all may raise many eyebrows among their peers. People who don’t value their marriage and refrain from attending to their children are considered nothing less than sheer failure in the Indian Culture. This is one of the reasons why divorces are not very common in India. The Indian culture stresses upon tolerance and empathy among relationships.

Thus, In India, success may be measured by a variety of factors. A good combination of all the above mentioned criteria defines success in the Indian society.

The American economy is fed by our materialistic desires. Even during the tough financial struggles of a recession, many Americans continue to purchase that which is bigger and better. America is the top consumer of global products and resources. This local and global buying obsession may be one of the pillars holding the economy out of a depression. Although the economy can benefit from materialism, it also weakens overall financial stability of the individuals that fall prey to it.

Keeping up with the Jones’ is a classic way to describe the goal of the average American. The possession of the latest and greatest, the biggest and best, is how many believe they are measured in society. The constant struggle to be on top may build the economy, but it crushes an individual’s financially security. It is impossible for most Americans to maintain their status and still save for emergencies, the future, and retirement. A drive down many neighborhood streets will tell a tale of comfort and privilege. However, a look at the savings accounts and credit reports of most will show a different story. Materialism leads to a false picture of wealth. This picture is what others want and go into debt in order to achieve. This causes a vicious cycle that has turned into the American way of life.

The healthy balance of work and play found in many other countries seems impossible to accomplish in America. It takes more money to feed the need for more things. Therefore, life for many Americans is filled with long hours at work and less hours at play. Comfort and peace are not achieved through quality time with family and friends, but with a new electronic device and bigger home. Like drugs, materialism gives a short time high and leaves the user in a state worse than before.

Materialism in America pushes and pulls at most of us. It pushes us to work harder and achieve more. However, the achievements are thin and meaningless when compared to the great accomplishments life has to offer. Getting married and starting a family are two major life changes that many put on hold because the situation is not perfect. Owning a home was often a goal for young couples to achieve before having children. The increasing power of materialism has taken that simple plan and magnified it. Now that same young couple will keep waiting until they have the right house in a prestigious neighborhood. Those points in life that give it true meaning are held back by the desire to be measured against a ruler that is constantly changing.

Americans are guaranteed life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The fullness of the American dream includes the belief that we all have these rights and should never be held back from achieving them. The pursuit of happiness does not mean the pursuit of the most current technology or an upgraded vehicle. It was the right to achieve the most basic and simple desires, regardless of where you stood in the social pecking order. However, materialism has changed that. It has led us backwards on the path the great leaders of our country forged.

Women don’t have an independence in picking out their clothing. It is thought that the concealment of the whole body except for the face and hands preserves morality and checks sexual chaos. On the assumption of guarding women’s honor, women are kept locked up, isolated and unable to enjoy a full life. This is called purdah in India.

Women cannot have any encounters with men that are not related to them without the presence of a male relative. The separation of the sexes make it hard to go out of their homes and to join society in any way at all. A female can not elect her husband,where she lives , or to journey where she pleases.

Females don’t have very much self-independence and are considered to require the safety of their sires, spouses, or masculine family members all through their existence. All behavior that weakens the image of male domination will pollute and soil the Sharia law. There are what are called honor killings of women and men. This is when a person is assumed to have had an illicit alliance.

Marriage is an agreement where the spouse must supply the wife with a livelihood. The female spouse should have sexual relations at the wish of her husband. The male spouse can end the marriage through announcing three times he has renounced his wife. Polygamy of four spouses are allowed. In the Shi’te faction, shortlived marriage is granted and the male spouse has an avenue to an infinite quantity of women. Men can have mistresses and bondwomen.
In various Islamic countries, women can only marry an Islamic man. Men are granted authority to wed non-Islamic women.

Even though Indonesia has the most Muslims of any country, there is a noteworthy indulgence for different religions. Islam is not the state religion. Women have a very influential function in society, family, and government.Examples of various Islamic laws in other countries are:In India, Islamic females are enclosed in their own homes. When leaving home, they have to wear the burqua which covers women head to toe including the face. Women are not even permitted into their own backyards unless they wear a burqua and are chaperoned by masculine kindred.In Pakistan, there is purdah, honor killings and child marriages. In Turkey, there is a high illiteracy rate for women, discrimination in the work place, and honor killings. In Bangladesh, there is domestic abuse usually over dowries, limited education, and inheritance. In Iran, there is polygamy and hijab which means no exposure of the body excluding the hands and face. If hijab is not obeyed the woman can be sent to jail or given up to seventy lashes. In Egypt, women are seen as incomplete because they are not men. They have child marriage and genital mutilations,

Sharia law harkens to the inclusive collection of Islamic law. The Sharia assimilated from the Islamic sacred text, the Koran and traditions, the Hadith. These beliefs were gleaned from the life of Muhammad, the Islamic prophet. Sharia is regarded as God’s law and cannot be altered or corrected as oppose to manmade law.

The Islamic laws regarding women seem to be extremely harsh and restrictive to the Western mind. Western women have been treated with dignity and have the autonomy of their lives.

The largest effect of smoking is, well, addiction. Addiction is being enslaved to a habit or practice, to such a degree that stopping it, if you can, causes severe trauma. Those who work at quitting smoking experience a plethora of physical withdrawal symptoms including heightened irritability, coughing and insomnia, but there is a long list of psychological symptoms that go along with trying to quit. Depression, boredom and loneliness are all very real psychological effects those trying to quit cigarettes experience.

Wait a minute though, if the psychological effects of smoking were all bad, people wouldn’t get hooked in the first place, would they?

The kicker here is that all of the psychological effects of smoking aren’t bad; in fact, nicotine is a very powerfully addictive drug, and it’s really the nicotine that people become addicted to. According to the American Heart Association, nicotine actually changes the human brain and causes smokers to physically and psychologically need the substance to function. When a person inhales nicotine smoke, the chemical quickly absorbs into the lungs and passes into the bloodstream, which quickly transfers it throughout the entire body.

As the nicotine travels deeper into the brain through the bloodstream, the nicotine molecules begin locking into receptors throughout the brain. Now, nicotine’s molecule shape is a near perfect mimic of that of acetylcholine, a natural neurotransmitter that responsible for controlling muscle movements, breathing, heart rate, learning and memory; acetylcholine also unleashes other brain chemicals that regulate mood, appetite, memory, and most important of all, ones that stimulate the pleasure centers of the brain. The imposter nicotine particularly stimulates one center of the brain to release large doses of dopamine into the body, which give the smoker a deep, calm feeling of satisfaction. The smoker quickly learns to link that euphoric feeling with smoking and the addictive psychological damage is mostly done.

The second part of this psychological reaction that is happening in the brain is also what is going on at the time the smoker is lighting up. This is the environmental aspect of the psychological effects of smoking. For instance, most smokers light up when they are driving, after a meal, when they are talking on the phone or when they are bored. Along with the association that the brain makes between the euphoric feelings the dopamine dump provides is a situational association. This means that the person not only associates their new-found inner-zen with smoking, but also with smoking while driving, or smoking when talking on the phone, or smoking…well, whenever they’re doing what they’re doing when they’re smoking.

Because of this association, smokers will begin to change their behaviors and alter their lives to include smoking more. At this point the addiction qualifies as a mental disorder because it is interfering with the daily routines of the individual’s life; i.e. the smoker will go outside on a freezing winter day to have a smoke without a coat because he forgot it at home, but the need for a cigarette outweighs the logic of staying inside where it is warm.

Not all of the psychological effects of smoking appear when someone is trying to quit smoking; that’s just the glamorous side that makes good PSAs. Those effects have been there the entire time; from the first cigarette on, they are always with the smoker, controlling the habit for them.

From a physical standpoint, biology, as it relates to heredity, is the key element in human development, with the most obvious manifestation of family’s importance being physical features. Virtually everyone who sees a newborn notes the similarities of physical traits shared by the baby and its parents. Yet, while eye and hair color, facial features and expressions, and even the baby’s gestures are familial characteristics usually immediately assessed, the physical influence of family on human development encompasses far more.

Based in large part on heredity, the timetable for physical development has an impact on the rate and extent of growth, the age at which developmental milestones are achieved (such as talking, walking, etc.) the onset of puberty, even whether and the extent to which one develops grey hair. Clearly, the effect of family on physical aspects of human development is quite significant.

Likewise, emotional development is bolstered or impeded, as the case may be, by family. Dating back to World War II when orphaned babies failed to thrive after placement in orphanages, it was determined that the lack of touch — normally provided by families — stunted the growth of these orphaned babies and further caused them to become ill, develop emotional and intellectual deficits and, in some cases, to die. Albeit a very drastic circumstance, even without such extreme situations, families (or the lack thereof) have an enormous emotional effect on human development.

For instance, aside from the six basic emotions (happiness, sadness, anger, fear, disgust and surprise), which tend to be expressed facially in a universal manner across cultures, the provocation and behavioral expression of these and other emotions tends to be culture-specific, and furthermore, family-specific. In others words, children imitate the expression of emotions modeled by those they see around them. Therefore, the influence of family in this facet of human development is readily apparent in the similarity of emotional expression among family members, regardless of whether “family” is biological or adoptive.

Yet, psychologists believe that genetics also play a role in emotions. While modeling is essentially an environmental factor, with family being the primary environment, genetics’ part in the development of emotion is evident in twin studies as well as adoption studies. Published in the November 2007 issue of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, results of a twin study on the inability to express emotion (alexithymia) suggest that genetics have an evident and similar effect on all aspects of alexithymia. Similarly, adoption studies reveal an even greater degree of similitude in the expression of emotion between an adopted child and its biological parents than between the adopted child and the adoptive parents, thereby emphasizing the importance of family in this part of human development.

And, not to be remiss, the adverse effect that emotional abuse by family members has on human development cannot be overlooked. Countless studies and anecdotal records underscore the significant and lasting results of emotional abuse within families and its impact on emotional development.

Finally, reigniting the argument of nature versus nurture among psychologists and other experts is the idea that intellect and other cognitive activities have a hereditary component — a clear argument in favor of nature. In much the same way as indicated in emotion, twin studies also point to a certain degree of familial influence in cognition, with a much higher positive correlation between I.Q. scores of identical twins than between other siblings.

Likewise, adoption studies reflect this same type of correlation of I.Q. scores between adopted children and their biological parents, which is not indicated between these children and their adoptive parents. Additionally, from the perspective of nurture, the opportunities to which a child is exposed such as books, travel and museums — tending to be socioeconomic factors of family — have an augmenting effect on cognitive development.

Thus, biologically, emotionally and cognitively, the importance of family in human development cannot be underestimated. While not the sole determinant in any individual’s life, family clearly shapes human development in unmistakable and enduring ways.

Communism and Socialism both believe that Capitalism oppresses the common people and results in a monopoly of property, wealth and privilege. Both philosophies believe a new collective focus on society should replace the selfish drive of Capitalism. However, Socialists see change coming through a gradual adjustment brought on by social change. Communists believe that the people should rise up against the oppressors and demand a total renovation of the economic and political systems that are holding down the people. They maintain that Socialism is merely the first step in moving from a capitalistic to communistic society. Once the socialistic changes take hold and the common people are strengthened, they will realize total equality necessitates more control.

The level of control for each of these philosophies varies. Socialism, being more economically driven, believes in government, or collective, control and administration of all means of production and distribution of goods. Private property that results in monopolies, excessive wealth, and unfair poverty should be abolished. These changes will bring about balance and cooperation. Communism believes it is the government’s responsibility to eradicate the upper class. This can only be accomplished by complete government control of everything. Communism, unlike Socialism, believes there should be no private property at all and no rights to inheritance. They also call for government control of all communication, transportation, factories, agriculture, labor and education. This extreme authority and regulation of all areas of society, they pronounce, will guarantee protection from injustice. Both Socialism and Communism are based on strong ideals, but often fail to have strong results. Their plans for fairness and plenty for all people have not always bore fruit.

Economically, both socialism and communism have struggled. The capitalistic system of a competitive free market they fight against fails to be replaced by a strong, efficient economic plan. The energy spent controlling every aspect of the economy slows down the process. Communism, in particular, has historically failed because of the weight of the control. The government involvement in every detail results in a slow, cumbersome machine that fails to meet the needs of the people. Inaccurate calculations of needs often result in extreme shortages. Demands for unrealistic quotas lead to low quality production. The inaccuracy of supply and demand, combined with low quality products weakens the economic position of these countries, both globally and at home. The slow, poorly planned economic structure of both Socialism and Communism fail to meet the needs of the people. This shows the breakdown between the their ideals and their actual accomplishments.

Socialism and Communism are equally focused on protecting the common man. The methods they both use to end the oppression and increase equality are what seem to keep them from successfully realizing the ideal. The extreme level of control instituted in communistic governments is intended to offer more to the impoverished and oppressed. However, this institution has evolved into a lumbering machine that continues to burden their citizens with need and imbalance. Although they take different directions in achieving fairness and equality, both Socialism and Communism seem to simply replace the evil of Capitalism with their own failures.

China and Google

This policy clashed with that of Google, one of the world’s most high-profile companies, in January, when Google stated that it would no longer continue to operate in China unless the government discontinued the practice of filtering its search-engine results. The company also listed a series of “cyber attacks” that were intended to hack into human rights advocates’ accounts on Gmail, the e-mail service it offers. China stoically responded that anyone who does business there is obliged to comply with the country’s laws.

In March, Google closed down its search service in China and directed users to its search engine in Hong Kong, which is uncensored. While the company’s aim was to comply technically with Chinese law, government officials appeared to be angry at the move, and it seemed that the conflict would escalate, with the Hong Kong search service being blocked in mainland China.

Previously, there had been some speculation that the presence of Google in the country (although it would be censored) could help weaken the government’s stronghold on the Web and provide the people with more information. Instead, we now know that each web site in China must employ people who monitor content and delete what is considered to be objectionable, and thousand of others have the task of “guiding” bulletin board exchanges on the Internet to favor the government’s policy.

Censorship is nothing new

Last year, the Chinese government advocated—and later set aside—a requirement that a new software program, “Green Dam-Youth Escort,” should be installed on all new computers made there. This would have monitored virtually every move the user made, and the government met with strong resistance at home and abroad, which cause it to delay enforcing the rule, at least temporarily.

While people in China who have access to the Internet have always lived with censorship, the situation grew noticeably worse in December of 2008. Charter 08, a pro-democracy group that was headed by highly respected intellectuals, circulated a petition online calling for the Communist Party to relinquish its power, and their web site was shut down.

Initially, government censors launched a campaign that claimed to be concerned with issues of morality and decency, but in the end, they closed down 250 blogs and over 1,900 web sites. Many of these were instant-message groups, online discussion forums, and cell phone text messages in which various sensitive issues, including politics, were discussed.

While it has built an extremely sophisticated Internet firewall, China still has a dynamic community of 70 million bloggers, and in January of 2009, officials proudly boasted that the number of Web users in the country was approaching 300 million—more than any other nation in the world. The government also employs a number of people who pretend to be ordinary Internet surfers and act in support of the status quo. They are referred to jokingly as members of the “50 Cent Party,” because they are frequently paid 50 Chinese cents for every posting.

Ironically, as China seeks to improve its status in the global economy, officials in Beijing are trying to balance the task of censoring Web content in order to maintain control with the country’s obvious need for information from the outside world. Also, as China’s media become more commercialized, the result is increased competition, content that is more diversified, and greater stress on investigative reporting by the country’s news agencies.

The idea of fairness is an equalizing cause that brings people together and spurs them into action. Both Capitalism and Socialism are grounded by the idea of fairness. It is, in essence, their focus. However, they both see fairness as measured by something entirely different from the other. Capitalists believe that fairness is found in the freedom of competitive pricing, production, and distribution of goods. It is also highlighted by the private ownership of property and decision making. Socialists believe fairness can only be achieved by the equal distribution of wealth and opportunity through collective means. The government owned and managed production and distribution of goods allows steady work for everyone and a society built on equal lifestyles. Capitalists reward their labor with possibilities of wealth, power and property. Socialists offer social justice through equal opportunity, pay, and care. The workforce for each magnifies this key difference of focus and cause.

No ideal can become reality unless is has been embraced by the group. In the case of Capitalism, the labor force believes that education, hard work, patience and connections can lead to prestige and wealth for everyone. Any negative issues that arise from the combination of human nature and competition are simply a small price to pay for the immense opportunities offered by the system. Socialism expects just the opposite from its workers. Socialists believe that the natural human need to care for each other is built into the concepts of collective control. They feel that the workers will accept and embrace the loss of control to governmental authority as an exchange for the betterment of society. For these two methods, the freedom or control of the worker is what makes their policies successful.

The level of social care is also defined by these different views. Socialists build every part of their system around the needs of the people. Socialistic governments have high tax rates, so as to pay for the social programs, such as medical care. Capitalists systems, being more focused on the individual’s achievements, tends to handle social issues as a second thought. Programs are funded by government transfer of wealth. The competitive drive of the Capitalist demands that each person choose to work hard for what they need. The scale of individual wealth versus care through the collective continues to tip back and forth in political elections.

Capitalism and Socialism are both driven by strong ideals. One looks to competitive economics to allow the worker to provide for himself and achieve any level of success. The other believes the willingness to relinquish wealth and prestige, for the good of the many, will result in a strong economy and society. History shows us that the internal struggle between the self and the group will continue to manifest itself in this way. The global picture is colored by both of these systems. Capitalism and Socialism are part of an international battle of practicality versus ideology, empowerment versus support, and choice versus control.