A Psychological Analysis of My Writing
"God! I've always hated this stupid shrink's office. Everything is placed so god damned precisely. Everything is so god damn clean. It's as if the bastard is striving for perfection. Strive. That's all he can do. Thinks he knows everything. Thinks he knows how I think, when even I don't know how I think..."
"Man, this fellow's office is immaculate. I can't see a speck of dust anywhere. Christ, this guy is really anal. Holy Ghost! Now, I'm starting to sound like freakin' Freud. The man's got me thinking like a shrink. This isn't good. No, not at all..."
"Hey! What's that!?! It's my flippin' file. The anal-retentive bastard left out my flippin' file. Well, it's about me...and I have a right to see what he's saying about me--don't I? Heck yes!"
"Let's see here. What's this? Oh, it's that stupid exercise he had me do. Geez! I wrote that over twelve weeks ago. I don't know why I had to do that moronic exercise. It's like he's going to find out anything about me in a two page piece of exposition using an extended metaphor for my conception of life at a university. Jesus, I can't even remember what metaphor I used. I hope I compared the university to a colon, because of all the crap I have to deal with. Alright, maybe school isn't that bad. Well, since the shrink is usually fashionably late, I might as well read the damn thing..."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last summer, a few of my friends and I went on a canoe trip in the Quetico. I had never been on a canoe trip prior to this excursion, so I only had a vague idea of what I would be subjected to on such a trip. I naively believed that the whole affair would be something like a vacation absent the amenities, but, as I soon discovered, it was anything but a vacation. At the end of our first day of paddling, I was wet and exhausted. From this rather inauspicious beginning, my vacation devolved quickly into a hellacious "forced march." You see, my friend, who planned the trip, had set a destination that he thought that we should reach by the end of the third day and that if we didn't reach this destination we couldn't claim to be men. Initially, I thought that the whole trip was a waste of time and money; I couldn't believe that anyone, masochists excluded, would want to participate in such an affair.
A) As the title already tell the reader, Bernice is the protagonist. She can be very unappealing at times, most because she’s a really boring and predictable character especially when most of her conversations with others lead to talking about the weather, she is also very naive because she doesn’t understand why she is unpopular with people or why boys don’t like her. At the end other the story though we like her because she seeks revenge on her cousin and sticks to her word even though it turns into a disaster. Marjorie, the cousin, at first is looked at as an antagonist because she talks bad about Bernice behind her back (which Bernice overhears), but then she is seen as a foil because she helps Bernice learn the ways to become popular, only to then regret this decision and takes it upon herself to tell everyone that Bernice didn’t actually bob her hair like she said. She then becomes the antagonist again. This shows that Majorie is self-centered because she doesn’t want Bernice to take the ‘limelight’...
Irony shown in the resolution is when Ulrich and Georg both think men have come to save them when they see dark silhouettes running in their direction. In reality, once the wolves arrive they eat and kill the men rather than save them as they hope. The author misleads the audience by including many sections in which Ulrich and Georg make up, recognize they must work as a team and agree to provide assistance to each other. Saki guides readers to assume the story will end with Ulrich and Georg helping each other out. Instead, she concludes the story with the men being devoured by wolves, in an ironic, suspenseful, and unpredictable
Scott: A watch with his initials on it, a day planner with the murder scheduled, a haiku called "Time to Kill Dr. Jeffrey O'Dwyer." "Dr. O'Dwyer, time to have your head smashed in, with my new hammer." Terrance, you may be a famous surgeon, but you're not God. Je accuse Terrance.
In the time of Renaissance, which has been characterized by the age of reawakening of humanism. The prince plays one of the most important role in the dramatic developing of political in the Renaissance period and still hold an universal impact on today's politicians. However its views points has been debating over time. Machiavelli maintain the thoughts which is the essential for the cruel to a successful leader. To those of view points according to Machiavelli's thoughts are the arguments that a prince is to be clement or cruel, to be feared or loved. Those significance are appeared in his written and plays the main role in his viewpoints.
“The neighbour feud had grown into a personal one since Ulrich had came to be the head of the family; if there was a man in the world whom he detested and wished ill to it was Georg Znaeym, the inheritor of the quarrel and the tireless game snatcher and raider of the disputed border forest.”(1) If Georg had not stolen from Ulrich he wouldn’t be mad and would not went out to kill him, preventing them from becoming friends.
Machiavelli's writings dealt with many issues that had not been attacked in his time, and utilized his distinct brand of political philosophy to try and change the politics and government that shaped his era. The Prince, regarded as his most controversial and successful work, spelled out a method of amelioration; whether positive or negative, virtuous or severe, a prince was to uphold the strength of a nation and a government. The next few pages will take a closer look at the life that has followed Niccolo Machiavelli, the use of historical allusions and the explicitness used in The Prince.
Change is interwoven in the learning process and therefore is inevitable. It is beyond amazing to reflect on ourselves and see how much we change in just six months. I do not know what is more remarkable—the change itself or knowing that that change represents an expansion in our knowledge, a growth in our abilities, and an improvement in our writing. However, one thing I am sure of is that it feels good to see that, excuse the cliché, hard work does pay off.
Over my career of schooling my writing has changed dramatically at times and very little at others. Through my years of schooling people have determined my main weaknesses and strengths that I should work on with my writing. My biggest weakness is writing introductions and conclusions they must be so complicated and require so much thought to be defined as good. I excel at writing body paragraphs and explaining all the facts that back up your main ideas though.
There are endless types of writing styles that people use. They use the one that they believe expresses their thoughts most clearly. I’m not sure if my writing style is part of those that are often used and to be honest, I do not know what type of style I use when I write. I think that the hardest part about writing is just getting started. That is why when I have a writing assignments I always start by using an I-chart. The I-chart is kind of shaped like an I, I learned how to make one when I was in elementary and it always has been useful for when I need to write. The I-chart consists of the top being the Intro, the middle having on the left three main topics and on the right there are examples for the main topics, and the bottom of the
The thoughts of Ulrich protecting his land and how tired he is of Georg trying to steal his land; produces a conclusion in Ulrich’s mind, that murder is the only solution: “The two enemies stood glaring at one another for a long silent moment. Each had a rifle in his hand, each had hate in his heart and murder uppermost in his mind.” (Saki Page 3). The feeling of savagery in the two main characters, foreshadows how the quarrel is to be finalized. The planned response to this quarrel does not end in meeting the other and killing the other with a shot, but is instead compromised. The compromise of the quarrel is them waiting for whoever's foresters come and return for them first: “We fight this quarrel out to the death, you and I and our foresters, with no cursed interlopers to come between us. Death and damnation to you, …” (Saki Page 4). When Georg says that they will fight out their quarrel to the death, the savagery in their tone is strong, and will not be pushed away. In Ulrich’s mind murder is the choice to solve this problem, no matter the cost. As you can see, Wolves are to savagery as, Ulrich is to
Every essay begins with a blank stare into space, an exasperated sigh, and the inevitable thought: what am I going write about? Or at least that is how they used to begin, and this process may have continued for hours, or even days, with each time I sat down determined to write nothing would make it on the paper. This became a major roadblock in my writing process, because every essay took an unreasonable amount of time thinking about how to approach this topic, typing sentences out and the deleting them. Finally, an idea would come and I would begin to write, the words would finally spill out onto the paper. The terrible experience writing forced me to figure out a new way to brainstorm my essay weeks before the essay was assigned.
When doing my writing process there are a lot of this I like to do and do not like to do. To begin my writing process my environment has to be exceptionally tidy/clean. I like my space to be moderately lit, meaning not too much of a bright light and neither too dull. Most times I will not play music in the background, but if I do it will be soft, coffee shop or jazz music with no lyrics. I normally like to sit upright on my bed with a cushion behind my back or on a soft rotating chair at a desk. My environment has to be warm and smell nice. I also prefer when I have a snack and a bottle of water close by to keep me motivated while doing my writing process. I cannot be around a loud environment or too many friends unless they are all quiet and doing work also.
The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli isn't about one man's ways to feed his power hungry mindset through gluttony, nor is it just explaining altercations between a nation's states. This writing is regarding to how one's self-confidence can make them become powerful in a society and also, the way morals and politics differ and can be separate in a government. Originally, Machiavelli wrote The Prince to gain support from Lorenzo de' Medici, who during the era, was governor of Florence. As meant as writing for how a society should be run, this book has been read by many peoples around the world who want to have better knowledge of the perfect stability of beliefs and politics required to run a good civilization.
A crucial reason in favour of mental accounting and overconfidence is decision efficiency. Real-life investing scenario changes every moment Time-consuming and systematic thinking process seldom is allowed during the intense decision-making (Stewart Jr et al., 1999, Busenitz and Barney, 1997). Additionally, the ‘small world’ used by the economic theory, which only applied to strict condition, is not necessarily applicable in the practical investment decision. As the assumption in those analysis approach may not conform with real life well and for most of times, cognitive heuristics is more suitable for the uncertainty(Gigerenzer and Gaissmaier, 2011). However, there is also a few argument against them, for it may hinder people from examining their investment choice thoroughly. Research shows that they did not perceive themselves as risk taker, but in fact, they are more likely to take relatively low return alternatives as ‘opportunities’, indicating that they are risk-taking to a great extent(Palich and Ray Bagby, 1995). As a result of the illusion created by such factors, decision makers tend to be narrow-minded in composing strategies and unable to bring enough information into thought(Schwenk, 1988). It was demonstrated by several researches that decisions made by means of biases and heuristics impose
History is a story told over time. It is a way of recreating the past so it can be studied in the present and re-interpreted for future generations. Since humans are the sole beneficiaries of history, it is important for us to know what the purpose of history is and how historians include their own perspective concerning historical events. The purpose and perspective of history is vital in order for individuals to realise how it would be almost impossible for us to live out our lives effectively if we had no knowledge of the past. Also, in order to gain a sound knowledge of the past, we have to understand the political, social and cultural aspects of the times we are studying.