Archives for October 2008

In the book The Sacred Quest, the authors Lawrence Cunningham and John Kelsay discuss the religious notion of ritual. They define ritual as being “a ceremonial act or a repeated stylized gesture used for specific occasions” (76). In the context of religion, rituals are a necessity in order to shape beliefs and values. Rituals can take hold in many different forms, which are elaborated upon by the authors. One specific form of rituals includes “rites of passage”. These are rituals that are intertwined with transitional moments in a person’s life (79). Rites of passage are necessary for a follower of a religion to move from stage to stages of their life. They are very important rituals because they mark milestone moments in a person’s life in their church. Despite how secular a family may be, rites of passage are moment of life still highly associated with religion.

Typically the first rite of passage in one’s life, birth rituals mark a person’s entry into their faith. This ritual is performed at a young age and celebrates the new followers’ initiation. In Judaism, the male child becomes a member of the Jewish people upon circumcision, as this is seen through the bible to be a covenant between God and the Jews (80). Baptism is the birth ritual associated to Christianity, through which a child officially becomes a member of the church. Many people see this as the ceremony which differentiates Christians from non-Christians. Finally, Cunningham and Kelsay describe a Hindu ritual feeding, which initiates a male into the religion.

The next type of rites of passage described is rituals of initiation. These rituals typically signify the growth of a child to an adult. Often these rituals take place during the adolescence. Adulthood in Judaism is signified through the celebration of bar or bat mitzvah. In Christianity, the onset of adulthood is denoted with the sacrament of confirmation. One last example of initiation is marriage. Even though the actual marriage ceremony is often modern and contemporary, the rite of marriage is an old religious tradition (81). Marriage is a ritual contained in nearly all religious.

The last type of rites of passage described is rituals of mourning and death. These rituals mark the end of one’s life and are performed in the moments of death and after death. Rituals of mourning and death are performed even in the most secularized cultures. The process of mourning is ritualized in various ways in different religions. Taoists, for example, perform elaborate ceremonies signifying the soul’s journey into the underworld and its rescue and delivery into heaven (81). This ceremony can take months of planning and preparation. On the contrary, Muslims and Orthodox Jews perform very simple and quiet ceremonies and typically bury the deceased within a day of their death. Burial ceremonies often symbolize the connection between humankind and the natural world. Hindus in India may cremate the deceased and scatter their ashes in the Ganges river to symbolize the never-ending cycle of life and death. Christians bury the dead in the ground, as the bible says humanity was created from the “dust of the earth” (81). Other rituals of death are designed to aid the dead in their crossing to the afterworld. This is shown by Egyptians and Native Americans who bury the dead with gifts, and by Catholics who pray for those who have passed away.

In my opinion, Cunningham and Kelsay show more similarities than differences between the different religions with respect to rites of passage. For example, they discuss how all birth rituals serve the same basic purpose; to formally introduce a child into the religion. Though the actual ceremonies are different for the varying religions, the purpose they serve is exactly the same. Likewise, rituals of initiation also serve the same purpose throughout religions. They all serve as ceremonies to celebrate the transition for a child into adulthood. Again, the ceremonies are not the same for all religions, but Cunningham and Kelsay do not really go into detail about the ceremonies and exploit the differences. They point similarities the religions share in the rituals.

However, when discussing rituals of mourning and death, Cunningham and Kelsay make more evident the differences in ritual between different religions. They describe how some religions use burial rites to help the deceased in their journey through the afterworld, such as Native Americans and the ancient Egyptians who bury the dead with trinkets. On the contrary, Roman Catholics instead pray for the dead to achieve this same goal. The authors also describe the actual ceremonies. Taoist culture, which includes an elaborate ceremony, is compared the monotonous ceremonies of the Jewish and Muslims. The ceremonies serve the same purpose of letting go of the dead, but they are gone about in completely different manners. The comparisons in this section make the purpose of rituals of mourning and death seem much different in the various religions. Birth rituals and rituals of initiation for the most part serve the same purpose throughout all religions, while rituals of mourning and death seem to have more differentiating purposes and ceremonies in religions.

The political, economic, and social situations in countries can be assessed using a variety of methods. The most basic way to determine how a country is functioning would be to directly ask the peoples of the country how they feel about their current situation. A problem with this method is that one would encounter opinion and bias from the indigenous peoples, which would not reveal a definitive picture as to how the country is doing. Another method would be to simply observe the country at hand and gather data to determine how they are faring. Using specific criteria and mathematical formulas, this is what companies such as Freedom House have to done to create indices such as the “Economist Index of Democracy”, and the “Failed States Index”. While this method of assessing a country’s current political, economic, and social situations is more precise and accurate than simply asking the inhabitants of a country for their thoughts, there is no perfect way to determine a country’s condition, and obviously there are problems with these indices.

Freedom House has three indices, dealing with political freedom, civil liberties, and electoral democracy (Kekic 2007, 6). The indices are based on a 1-7 scale, which divide countries into three groups; free, partly free, and not free (McCormick 2007, 7). Countries which score a 1 to 3 are considered free, countries which score 4-5 are considered partly free, and countries which score a 6-7 are considered not free. There are 10 indicators of political freedom, which deal with the ability of the people to participate in the political process, and 15 indicators of civil liberties, which deal with freedom of expression, personal autonomy, and economic rights (Kekic 2007, 6). These two factors are the primary components which determine how democratic a country is according to Freedom House. The electoral democracy index is also used to an extent for this purpose. However, it is highly specified and deals mainly with the process of actually electing officials.

Problems with these indices lie mainly within the scoring system. First of all, ranking how free a country is on a scale of 1 to 7 seems fairly arbitrary. I would think that there would have to be an “ideal” democracy from which all other countries are compared to, but according to this system I do not think that is the case. Whatever country best represents democracy receives the highest score of a 1, even if they may not be perfect. Another problem is that the indicators don’t carry any weight to my knowledge, meaning that all indicators are treated equal. In my opinion, there should be certain indicators which carry more value than others. Finally, the electoral democracy index is too specific, and doesn’t take into account any other factors besides the actual voting process.

The Economist Index of Democracy describes how democratic a country is. The index is based on five categories including electoral process and pluralism, civil liberties, the functioning of government, political participation, and political culture (Kekic 2007, 10). Electoral process and pluralism first define whether or not fair elections are being held. Civil liberty deals with the protection of basic human rights. Functioning of the government entails how democracy is implemented into the government. Political participation measures how free people are to vote. Finally, political culture analyzes if competitive, yet gracious elections are held. The index is calculated based on an average score from 60 indicators in the 5 categories (Kekic 2007, 11). Adjustments are made to the scores if they do not score at least a 1 in certain categories. Point values of most of the questions are based on a 0-1 scale (including 0.5).

This index is not as flawed as the Freedom House indices, but it does have its share of problems. It is difficult to tell how democratic a country is using a limited set of requirements for democracy. I would think that more than 60 indicators would be needed for accuracy. The scoring system again seems flawed. A 0-1 scale seems like it makes requirements too black and white. Since there are only 3 choices to pick from in this scale, it seems like that would increase error. I would think 5 choices for each requirement would increase the validity of the test. I do think that adjusting scores if one category is low is a good idea. The Freedom House indices did not give any weight to their questions, and it seems like there is value added to questions here.

Lastly, the Failed States Index determines how unstable and volatile countries are. It is based on 12 indicators which deal with social, economic, political, and military factors (Foreign Policy 2007, 18-19). Among the 12 indicators are demographic pressures, human flight, factionalized elites, and external intervention. The index is compiled by first basing each indicator on a 10 point scale, and then combining the scores from each indicator for a total score. The higher the score, the less stable the country is. Differences in score from year to year for each country are noted, which can tell if a country is improving or becoming worse (Foreign Policy 2007, 20).

The problem with this index is that it doesn’t list the positives about the countries at hand; it only deals with the negatives. This exploits the problems of the countries.. This index also suffers from the problem of a point system, which assigns arbitrary values to the indicators. There is no exact definition of a failed country which the scale is based off of, so only whichever countries are performing the worst are considered failing. Lastly, when assigning point values, it can be difficult to compare one country to another. In a sense, it is like comparing apples and oranges; there are different factors which account for what is going on in each country. Overall, I feel the described indices have flaws, but they are still probably the best indicators of the world political stances available at the moment.

There are numerous views on how the world is shaped. People interpret different reasons for why the world is functioning the way it currently is. The current economic, political, and social situations have arisen from a plethora of different factors, which writers such as Huntingdon, Barber, Katzenstein and Keohane, and Fukuyama have pursued the undertaking of explaining. Each of these writers views vary greatly, even though they all have lived through the same world events. It can not necessarily be inferred that one writer’s view is right and that another’s is wrong because all of them are merely stating their opinions. I, however, believe that Barber is most correct on his view of the current world status.

Barber sees the world as “McWorld” vs. “Jihad”, or rather globalization versus Lebanonization. While these two factors are nearly polar opposites, he sees them both as threats to democracy. Barber’s view of globalization deals with the MTV’s, the Nike’s, the Macintosh and the McDonalds which are commercially forming all nations into a homogenous global network, for the better or for the worse (Barber 1992, 226). He says, “The planet is falling apart and coming together at the same time” (Barber 1992, 226). Western ideas are spreading everywhere and the world is becoming more and more similar no matter where you go. Barber discusses four main imperatives of globalization, including market, resource, information-technology, and ecological. These imperatives deal with subjects like how countries are becoming dependent on each other and how there is a loss of nationalism.

On the flip-side, Barber views “Jihad” as specific cultures who are at war with not just globalization, but with the traditional nation-state (Barber 1992, 226). These people that were brought together through nationalism, but now want to become separate entities and try to escape and bring down “McWorld”. Both are a threat to democracy, for different reasons. Lebanonization is simply against everything democracy and Western culture stands for. Globalization on the other hand really has no care for the rights of the people as long as money is being made and ideas are spreading (Barber 1992, 229). I agree with Barber on most of his points, except that I don’t think globalization is undemocratic. I think many democratic ideals are what make globalization work. The main players in globalization are democratic countries, and the recipients of globalization are typically the ones that aren’t necessarily democratic and would like to become democratic in nature. I do agree with his ideas that globalization and Lebanonization are driving the world.

Huntingdon’s view on the world is one that predicates on a “clash of civilizations”. He thinks that great divisions among humankind, and that the dominating source of conflict will be culture (Huntingdon 1993, 22). He thinks that all global conflicts will be based on differences between different civilizations. Huntingdon also says the important conflicts of the future will occur along the cultural fault lines separating these civilizations from one another, for example in the Middle East (Huntingdon 1993, 22). A catalyst to conflict is that as the world is become a smaller place due to technology, it means that interactions between peoples of different civilization are increasing, which leads to an increased possibility of conflict and war (Huntingdon 1993, 25). I do not really agree with Huntingdon because peoples within civilizations argue with each other all the time. It is really just people that do not agree with each other, not civilizations or cultures. Countries nowadays are made up of people from all different backgrounds. There are a few select groups of people who do have an “us” versus “them” mentality, including religious based cultures such as Islam, but for the most people I feel that people don’t clash, which is apparent due to globalization, where most people seem to agree on similar ideas and values, which is what makes globalization work.

Fukuyama’s world view on the other hand, is one that the world ended development after the French Revolution and democratic ideas started to take hold (Fukuyama 1989, 3-4). He thinks that democracy is the highest form of organization, and that once it started to take hold, no real big development have taken place. Fukuyama borrows many of his these views from the thinkers Hegel and Kojeve. Fukuyama also thinks that all human behavior in the material world, and hence history, is rooted in a prior state of consciousness (Fukuyama 1989, 5). Consciousness can be described in terms of religion, cultural, or moral habits. Fukuyama says “…the roots of economic behavior lie in the realm of consciousness and culture…” (Fukuyama 1989, 8). He then goes on to discuss how ideology can not truly be achieved in the world. Finally, he says only nationalism could possibly challenge liberalism, as fascism and communism have both failed (Fukuyama 1989, 10). I disagree with Fukuyama because there are still being advancements in politics today. There may have been some key ideas set forth after the French Revolution, but ideas are constantly being changed and molded. There is still a lot going on in the world.

Finally, Katzenstein and Keohane discuss the anti-American view of the world. They basically think that all world views are predicated on the rest of the world’s dislike for America (Katzenstein 2006, 205). There are ranging degrees of anti-Americanism, beginning with liberal anti-Americanism and ending with radical anti-Americanism (Katzenstein 2006, 206). The different types of anti-Americanists do not like American for varying reasons, such as because America is hands down the most powerful country; their expansion and capitalism; and their cultural and religious values (Katzenstein 2006, 208-209). I disagree with these views because I do not think that much of the world is anti-American. There are obviously some people that don’t like America, but that doesn’t mean all the world views and actions are predicated on a dislike for America. The number of allies America has far outweighs the number of enemies, and though it is the most powerful country, it does not control the rest of the world.

Russia, China, and Nigeria face several underlying democratic challenges. The Federal Security Service, or FSB, is one of the biggest institutions implemented in Russia that challenges the foundation of democratic ways (“The Making of a Neo-KGB State” 2007, 1). The FSB is the successor to the KGB, which was a powerful governmental organization that “provided a crucial service of surveillance and suppression”, and reinforced communist ways among the people. The FSB continues this tradition, with possibly even more oppression. It is said that “Apart from Mr. Putin, ‘There is nobody today that can say no to the FSB,’” (“The Making of a Neo-KGB State” 2007, 1). The FSB has a good deal of money and influence backed by high government officials. They are a ruthless organization that destroys the democratic values of free speech and press by taking aim against those who oppose the government. Writers and journalists have been jailed and killed for simply stating that they are against the Kremlin (“The Making of a Neo-KGB State” 2007, 4).

Another democratic challenge Russia faces is their unstable economy. Their economy is nearly solely based on energy providing natural resources (Skidelsky 2007, 1). The state of Russia’s economy is dependent on the price of energy. As energy prices go up, so does Russia’s economy. In the short run, this may seem like a stable way to grow an economy, but in the long run it can lead to instability. Prices of commodities are typically more volatile than that of industrial prices, which makes Russia vulnerable to sudden drops in the prices of resources (Skidelsky 2007, 1-2). Authoritarianism is promoted as democratic representation becomes less important due to the fact that states do not rely on income tax as much. They receive money from exporting resources. Fighting from can result from disputes over distribution of the resources within Russia. There are more problems from dependence of natural resources, but all seem to lead towards instability of the state. Democracy cannot be instituted when the state is not stable.

Russia does however have a great deal of stability in their political system. President Putin has an extremely high approval rating and seems to face no challenge for succession (Skidelsky 2007, 3). While many people are loyal to Putin, he garnishes too much power for Russia to be considered democratic. Putin has control over the KGB and FSB, which are loyal to him and make sure that opposing views are never heard or at the least controlled. Putin has employed systems where he basically controls everything that is going on; the people do not really have a say (Skidelsky 2007, 3). He has made it possible so that he is able to stay in office longer than intended by the constitution. In a democracy, that president should never have that much power or control. Russia obviously does not have the correct check and balances in place to limit Putin’s authority.

China faces similar democratic challenges. While China is economically stable, it suffers from other problems. In order to achieve their economic success, China had to make sacrifices in other areas. Human rights, for example, are somewhat lost in the mix when discussing economic reform. Illnesses and injuries often result from poor environmental and working conditions (Lee 2007, 1). While working conditions have improved over what they were in the past, they could be better. People often work long hours for minimal pay in less than desirable working conditions. This was a sacrifice that had to be made in order for China’s economy to improve so quickly.

Inflation is also a growing problem (Lee 2007, 2). Beginning with food shortages and a higher demand for nourishment, the prices of food have risen. Prices of other things, such as textiles, education, and medical care have also risen, contributing to inflation. Inflation can lead to problems such as poverty and a weak value of the yuan compared to other currencies. These problems are atypical of established democratic countries. While some nations do suffer from those problems, they have ways to deal with them. It will be seen whether or not China can control those issues.

China, like Russia, places a great deal of effort into censorship of people and ideas that could thwart the government. “Tank Man” is an excellent example of the censorship the Chinese government places on the media. Tank Man was a student or common citizen who blocked the path of a tank following the Tiananmen Massacre in 1989. This man forced the brigade of tanks to stop and would not let them pass. The Chinese government did all they could to destroy any evidence of this protest, but some pictures and footage squeaked by their grasp. In order to prevent the Chinese people from seeing the media, the government controls internet web searches, so that pictures of Tank Man will not appear. Most people living in China do not know of Tank Man. The government restricts the knowledge of other protests and tries to ban certain books from being read. Democratic nations protect the rights of their people and do not do these sorts of things.

Nigeria, a sparsely developed country, also suffers from democratic challenges. While Nigeria has an abundance of natural resources, most of its citizens are living in poverty (“Will Africa Ever Get it Right” 2007, 1). Those in positions of power believe that they are the ones that should reap the benefits of their resources. This leaves nearly everyone else high and dry. Nigeria has become known as an “every-man-for-himself nation” (Polgreen 1996, 1). Living conditions are horrible for most people, and it is a struggle just to stay fed. Democratic nations need to make sure their people have high standards of living, and Nigerian peoples obvious do not have this.

Another problem Nigeria suffers from is a lack of infrastructure (Polgreen 1996, 2). The government does not supply electricity and running water to a vast majority of the nation. This forces people to use generators and pumps in order to have electricity and water. A textile manufacturer was forced to shut down simply because it was too costly to supply light, power, and water to his factory (Polgreen 1996, 2). This lack of infrastructure makes it nearly impossible for industrialization, which is needed in order to advance to economy and become a stable country. Unless Nigeria develops and infrastructure, it will never be able to become a democracy.

One last issue Nigerians have to deal with is corrupt elections. According to the Afrobarometer survey, “African voters are losing patience with faulty elections that often exclude popular candidates and are marred by serious irregularities” (Polgreen 1996, 1). Free and fair elections are a necessity in order for democracy to take hold (Linz and Stephan 1996, 15). Elections in Nigeria have been overshadowed by violence and corruption, which means that their elections are not legitimate (Polgreen 1996, 1). Those taking place in the electoral process should not have to deal with pressures like that. Nigerians also believe that elections will not help remove unjust leaders from their positions. This is often the case with corrupt leaders; they are not easily extricated (Ottaway 2003, 28).

All three of these countries face daunting challenges in order to develop and establish democracy. All three countries face the problem of either corrupted official in office or the governmental controlling too many aspects of their lives. Russia and Nigeria both suffer from economic instability in spite of their cornucopia of natural resources. China and Russia have stability in certain aspects, economy and political systems respectively, but overall they suffer instability. Nigeria seems to suffer from instability in all aspects. These democratic challenges must be address in order for Russia, China, and Nigeria to become more stable and democratic nations.

Introduction

During this laboratory experiment, a gas chromatograph was used to analyze the ethanol and butanol content of solutions of known mass ratios, and then construct a calibration curve using calculated area ratios from the graphs produced by the gas chromatograph. A solution of unknown mass ratio was then analyzed with the gas chromatograph in order to determine its area ratio. This area ratio was compared to the calibration curve in order to find the mass ratio of the unknown. Seven solutions of ethanol and butanol were prepared using different mass ratios of the two components. The solutions were then one by one injected into the gas chromatograph using a syringe. As each solution went through the gas chromatograph, the apparatus heated the solution. Ethanol and butanol have different chemical compositions and boiling points, so they reached a detector at different times. As the components reached the detector, the voltage given off by the components was read and recorded as a graph on a computer of time versus voltage.

Specifically, the gas chromatograph functions using an inert gas, in the case of this experiment, nitrogen, to function as a carrier gas for the analyte. The analyte is injected through a septum using a microsyringe. The carrier gas aids the analyte flow through the column. As the analyte moves through the column, the different components are separated and reach the detector at different rates, as the components have different chemical properties. In the case of this experiment, once the analyte reached the detector, the thermal conductivity of the components were measured as voltage. The voltage readings were graphed as a function of time on a computer.

Results

*The graph of the original unknown was unreadable to determine the ratio of the areas, so

Anwar’s group’s graph of unknown was used to find a ratio of areas.

Discussion and Conclusions

The calibration curve came out fairly well. It follows almost exactly a straight line except for the value where the ratio of masses was 5:3. The ratio of the areas is much lower than it should be. There is a decrease in the ratio of the areas from the 4:4 composition (1.100032), to the 5:3 composition (0.846482), and then the area ratio goes back up in the 6:2 composition (2.95128). The value for the ratio of the areas should have been somewhere between 1.100032 and 2.95128. Other than that one value, all the other values are very linear. It should have been expected that the values would linear, considering that the ratio of the masses was not increased exponentially; the ratios were only decreased and increased by a constant value. This also means the slope of the area ratio versus the mass ratio should be close to being in unity (a value of one), because of the constant increase and decrease in the mass ratio.

The ratio of the areas for the original unknown was unreadable on the graph, so another group’s unknown graph was used to find a ratio of areas. That group did not record their original masses used for their unknown sample, so it is not possible to find the percent error. However, using the equation for the linear regression line, the expected ratio of masses could be found by subbing the ratio of the areas in for “x”. The mass ratio found for their unknown was 1.750437, which is close to the mass ratio for the 5:3 composition (1.677444), so it can be estimated that their unknown was composed of about 5 grams of ethanol and 3 grams of butanol. A percent error can be determined by comparing one of the points on the calibration curve to the actual equation of the line. For example, using the 6:2 mass compisition, the actual mass ratio was 3.083036. However, using the calculated area, according to the calibration curve the theoretical mass ratio is 3.31701. This yields a percent error of 7.59%. This is a fairly low percent error, but it should be, as the linear regression line is calculated to make it as close to the points on the graph as possible.

Finally, using the alternative method of finding the ratio of areas by physically weighing the two curves, the value was extremely close to the calculated value. The calculated ratio for the 4:4 mass ratio was 1.100032, while the ratio from weighing the curves was 1.094. This shows that weighing all the curves would have been an acceptable way of determining the area ratios, rather than using the trapezoidal rule to calculate the area ratios. The trapezoidal rule has error to it, so weighing the curves may even be more accurate than using the trapezoidal rule. If it was not a requirement to use the trapezoidal rule, it would have been preferred to simply weigh all the curves, as this would have been a much quicker way of determining the area ratios.