La liberté de lhomme :: essays research papers

Comme nous l'avons vu en classe, la science et la foi sont divisà ©s profondà ©ment dans notre socià ©tà ©. Les scientifiques rejettent, de faà §on assez gà ©nà ©rale tout ce dont touche à   la foi. De leur part, les religieux s'en prennent aux scientifiques pour leurs tentatives de tout expliquer de manià ¨re rationnelle et scientifique. Dans cet article, Pierre Karli essaie de mettre au point les diffà ©rences fondamentales dans le dà ©bat entre la science et la foi, tout en essayant de rapprocher les deux. Il traà ®te d'abord de la science et de la foi de faà §on catà ©gorique, oà ¹ il indique ce dont nous apporte chacun ainsi que les "collusions" dont il voit entre la foi et le pouvoir politique et entre la science et le pouvoir politique. Il saute ensuite vers une discussion de l'à ªtre humain et la question de l'"instinct d'agression" pour finalement tomber sur une discussion du dà ©bat autour de la libertà © de l'homme. Les diffà ©rences entre la science et la foi ont à ©tà © dà ©battues pendant longtemps. Les scientifiques rejettent toute notion d'un Dieu crà ©ateur, puisqu'ils sont incapables de prouver de faà §on concrà ¨te son existence. Les religieux critiquent les scientifiques de toujours rationaliser et d'essayer de tout mesurer. Par exemple, comment peut-on mesurer l'amour? Les scientifiques peuvent-ils tout de mà ªme nier l'existence de cette force, cette à ©motion? De la part des religieux et croyants, le cas est de mà ªme pour Dieu. Karli dit qu'on ne peut pas comparer ces deux aspects par contre, puisqu'ils ne sont pas semblables. Le problà ¨me se retrouve que les religieux se servent d'une approche religieuse pour examiner la science. De l'inverse pour les scientifiques à   l'à ©gard de la religion. Mais ces deux champs ne peuvent pas à ªtre examinà ©s de la mà ªme manià ¨re. C'est ici que provient les affrontements entre les deux. La science se sert de raison pour pouvoir dà ©crire, mesurer et dà ©montrer. Les scientifiques essaient de tout mesurer, dà ©crire et dà ©montrer, mais arrivent à   un mur lorsqu'ils regardent des aspects mystiques ou religieux. La science, elle, nous permet une meilleure connaissance du monde et de notre relation avec celle-ci. De son cà ´tà ©, la foi est "l'adà ©sion à   une và ©rità © rà ©và ©là ©e, donnà ©e entià ¨re dà ¨s le dà ©part, et qui rà ©pond à   un besoin de transcendence, d'absolu." (Karli, p. 138) Elle nous dit ce qu'on doit faire dans la vie pour doter celle-ci d'un sens, d'une raison d'à ªtre. Mais pour Karli, ces deux ne sont pas mutuellement exclusifs comme nous le ferait croire les participants des deux champs. Karli, comme d'autres thà ©ologiens et religieux(Teilhard de Chardin, l'abbà © Laflamme1 entre autres) essaie de reconcilier la science et la religion. La libertà © de l'homme :: essays research papers Comme nous l'avons vu en classe, la science et la foi sont divisà ©s profondà ©ment dans notre socià ©tà ©. Les scientifiques rejettent, de faà §on assez gà ©nà ©rale tout ce dont touche à   la foi. De leur part, les religieux s'en prennent aux scientifiques pour leurs tentatives de tout expliquer de manià ¨re rationnelle et scientifique. Dans cet article, Pierre Karli essaie de mettre au point les diffà ©rences fondamentales dans le dà ©bat entre la science et la foi, tout en essayant de rapprocher les deux. Il traà ®te d'abord de la science et de la foi de faà §on catà ©gorique, oà ¹ il indique ce dont nous apporte chacun ainsi que les "collusions" dont il voit entre la foi et le pouvoir politique et entre la science et le pouvoir politique. Il saute ensuite vers une discussion de l'à ªtre humain et la question de l'"instinct d'agression" pour finalement tomber sur une discussion du dà ©bat autour de la libertà © de l'homme. Les diffà ©rences entre la science et la foi ont à ©tà © dà ©battues pendant longtemps. Les scientifiques rejettent toute notion d'un Dieu crà ©ateur, puisqu'ils sont incapables de prouver de faà §on concrà ¨te son existence. Les religieux critiquent les scientifiques de toujours rationaliser et d'essayer de tout mesurer. Par exemple, comment peut-on mesurer l'amour? Les scientifiques peuvent-ils tout de mà ªme nier l'existence de cette force, cette à ©motion? De la part des religieux et croyants, le cas est de mà ªme pour Dieu. Karli dit qu'on ne peut pas comparer ces deux aspects par contre, puisqu'ils ne sont pas semblables. Le problà ¨me se retrouve que les religieux se servent d'une approche religieuse pour examiner la science. De l'inverse pour les scientifiques à   l'à ©gard de la religion. Mais ces deux champs ne peuvent pas à ªtre examinà ©s de la mà ªme manià ¨re. C'est ici que provient les affrontements entre les deux. La science se sert de raison pour pouvoir dà ©crire, mesurer et dà ©montrer. Les scientifiques essaient de tout mesurer, dà ©crire et dà ©montrer, mais arrivent à   un mur lorsqu'ils regardent des aspects mystiques ou religieux. La science, elle, nous permet une meilleure connaissance du monde et de notre relation avec celle-ci. De son cà ´tà ©, la foi est "l'adà ©sion à   une và ©rità © rà ©và ©là ©e, donnà ©e entià ¨re dà ¨s le dà ©part, et qui rà ©pond à   un besoin de transcendence, d'absolu." (Karli, p. 138) Elle nous dit ce qu'on doit faire dans la vie pour doter celle-ci d'un sens, d'une raison d'à ªtre. Mais pour Karli, ces deux ne sont pas mutuellement exclusifs comme nous le ferait croire les participants des deux champs. Karli, comme d'autres thà ©ologiens et religieux(Teilhard de Chardin, l'abbà © Laflamme1 entre autres) essaie de reconcilier la science et la religion.

Is totemism a religion? Essay

Defining what constitutes a religion is a difficult, if not an impossible quest. However, before determining whether or not certain belief-systems and/or ritualized practices can be considered a religion, a definition is imperative. For our purposes, I am going to use the extremely elementary definition from Webster’s New Dictionary , â€Å"A system of faith and worship.† In The Elementary Forms of Religion, Emile Durkheim, a French Sociologist from the 19th Century, examines totemism in an effort to draw universals between all religions. Durkheim sets his focus on Australian totemism, because it is the most â€Å"primitive culture† with the most resources available. From Durkheim’s perspective, the basis of totemism is to create lasting societal bonds. Totemic tribes are assorted into clans whose unity results not from kinship, but from the religious relationship between the members. From Durkheim’s perspective, the totemism in this culture is based on the sacred relationships developed by the clan’s members in addition to some totemic unit, which is usually a plant or animals species common to the area. If an entire society is based around its sacred ritualized practices, it is only fair to consider those ritualized beliefs and practices as constituting a religion. Thus, the real question is, can a society whose spirituality is based on kinship, and whose idea of sacred lies only in the ties within the clan and not on a god or gods of some sort be considered a religion? The answer to this question is yes. Although totemic practices may not be familiar to many Westerners, when real speculation is given to various totemic religions, it is easy to see the complexity that underlies many forms of totemism. In addition, when looking at the religions that are common to us Westerners, can we really argue that our common religions are more logical than theirs? Through the totemic principles of the universe, and the worshiping of idols, even if these idols do not represent G-ds, it proves that totemism is most certainly a religion. Durkeim uses totemism as a basis from which answers to our lingering questions about modern religions can be drawn. â€Å"In our eyes, the question whether totemism has been more or less universal or not, is quite secondary. If it interests us, it does so before all because in studying it we hope to discover relations of a nature to make us understand better what religion is( Durkheim, 176).† Durkheim is using totemism as the platform from which  all other religions shall be compared to derive new and provoking ideas about religion. Durkheim believes totemism contains obvious religious qualities, even with the lack of a god or gods. † Finally, that which we propose to study in this work is the most primitive and simple religion which it is possible to find ( Durkheim 176).† Durkheim clearly considers totemism a valid although â€Å"simple† religion. Of course, this is only the opinion of one, we must delve into totemic rituals and beliefs before it can be proven that totemism is just as much of a religion as any other. Before arguing the attributes of totemism that allow it to be classified as a religion, a more thorough understanding of various totemic practices and the principle’s and beliefs behind those practices is necessary. The first and most prominent example that will be used to describe totemism, will be from the various Australian tribes described by Durkheim. The critical belief in Australian totemism, is the notion that the totemic entity, whatever it may be, is sacred. The entity is thought to bestow sacredness on whatever carries its mark. The totemic entity is used to mark various objects such as stones, sticks, wood, etc. in various rituals. â€Å"The totem is in fact a design which corresponds to the heraldic emblems of civilized nations, and each person is authorized to bear it as proof of the identity of the family to which it belongs ( Durkheim 180).† It is true that we have symbols and emblems that represent our society, which we deem sacred. Is that notion really so outlandish? Many patriotic Americans would be offended by the burning of the American flag, which is only an inanimate object to which we grant sacredness. This, however, is a nation and not a religion, but it is additionally quite common in many religions to revere objects. In Judeo-Christian religions, sacredness is assigned to a book, the Bible, among many other symbols from the Jewish Star to the Christian Cross. If the Bible is dropped or thrown down in many religions, it is seen as a direct offense to G-d, and one must kiss the book to compensate. Notice, also the dropping of the â€Å"o† in G-d. To many religious Jews even writing the name God is considered highly offensive. Assigning value to an object is a common trait across many religions, the difference is that the symbols used in totemism are not a representation for an actual god. Although the totemic emblem is not representative of a god that bears human-like qualities, it is deemed sacred and thus must be some sort of a representation of higher forces as opposed to higher beings. Totemic emblems are not only found on trees, in houses, on wood, etc, but also on the bodies of humans ( Durkheim 181). Whether they are marked on a body through mutilation, scarring, and tattooing, or whether the totems is represented on jewelry and on clothing, the adornment of totems on humans is yet another indication of its sacred value. â€Å"These totemic decorations enable us to see that the totem is not merely a name and an emblem. It is in the course of the religious ceremonies that they are employed; they are part of the liturgy; so while the totem is a collective label, it also has a religious character. In fact, it is in connection with it, that things are classified as sacred or profane. It is the very type of sacred thing (Durkheim 183).† â€Å"Sacred† is used to mean the things that are unworldly which cause humans to revere while â€Å"profane† is simply worldly matter. Once again, the assignment of so much value that one deems it sacred is evidence of religious qualities. Aside from the actual totemic emblem, there are other objects used in worship which are also considered sacred. The Arunta in particular, a tribe in Central Australia, uses an object called a churinga which is literally pieces of wood or polished stone, with the totemic entity marked upon it. Each group has a number of various churinga’s which sometimes bare a whole at one end where a thread made of human or opossum hair goes through. The thread allows the churinga to, when suspended, whirl into the air producing a humming noise which Durkheim compares to the toys of children ( Durkheim, 183, 119). These objects accompany rituals of any importance but also have a direct effect on the â€Å"sacred† and â€Å"profane.† The actual word churinga translates to mean sacred, and women, children, and young men who have not yet been initiated are not granted access to these instruments of piety. Having access to these instruments could be considered positive and negative. Certain churinga’s could not to be handled or viewed at by profane persons when not in use. Sometimes they were placed in secret hiding locations where the † sacred character of the churinga [was] so great that it communicates itself to the locality where they are stored ( Durkheim 184, 120).† Additionally they had powers such as they could create courage and  vigor in combat, heal sickness, and ensure fertility of the totemic animal or plant etc ( Durkheim 184, 120). In all, the sacredness the clan placed on these object is more than apparent and indicates the religious qualities of totemism. It is crucial to remember that the objects chosen to represent totemic symbols are in no way related to the actual symbol itself. The totem itself is not creating the religious feeling, but is solely a means to make tangible the spirituality that bonds a clan. In other words, totemism really has nothing to do with the totem. Instead it is the accumulated experiences of the various social units that creates those intense feelings of awe and reverence that has caused religion to last throughout the ages. Durkheim rationalizes this by saying that most individuals are vulnerable to authoritative figures in societies. In other words, people are inclined to follow individuals who have earned some sort of respect. Durkheim believes that in group environments, the authoritative individual has the capacity to make other individuals feel as though they are experiencing something that can not be experienced alone. People usually are incapable of distinguishing the cause of the intense feelings they are undergoing. Thus, the individuals in such a setting assume that it is some otherworldly force that is the cause of their newfound spiritual experience. The source of whatever is causing those feelings of intensity is what is deemed sacred. The sacred comes in different forms in all religions. In most religions sacredness is assigned to a god or gods. In totemism, it happens to be a totem which symbolizes the sacredness of the kinship in a clan. An interesting perspective that Durkheim holds is that in practice totemic religion in particular arose out of tribal life style. Individuals in tribal societies lived in groups too small to create the type of religious forces recognized by Durkheim. They usually lived spread across vast landscapes. On various occasions social meetings would be held that may be considered large enough to be called a mass of people. In Durkheim’s opinion, gatherings of this sort would effervesce, meaning that the spirituality that lies in the bonds of the group would build creating an even larger sense of religious awe. The group environment would cause the essential production of excited  behaviors and heightened emotions that propel belief in the sacred. A continuation off the previous belief, is Durkheim’s notion that sacredness is contagious. Through these group gatherings, Durkheim argues that the sacred is passed on by means of physical contact. This is proven through rituals that deem new things sacred when touched by previous instruments considered sacred. This is also common in Judaism where the Torah, the first five books in the Bible considered very sacred to the Jews, is touched by all those worshipping in the temple as a way of passing on the sacredness of the Torah to the members of the congregation. Catholics feel drinking wine that is blessed is equivalent to drinking the blood of Christ and thus feel they have attained a degree of sacredness through this ritual. Totemism is most certainly a religion, and bears all the qualities that many consider necessary before labeling something a religion. Durkheim used totemism to analyze the origins of religion in addition to the role religion plays in aiding people in understanding present society. It has been made evident that Durkheim considered religion essentially social viewing it from the eyes of a sociologist. In Durkheim’s mind, primal societies are where religion originated. He believed that although religion is only felt by individuals, it is an episode caused by a few factors. Due to the fact that religion is passed from generation to generation, the perspective that it is larger than any one person is created. The notion that it is larger than an individual allows individuals to become awe stricken by its seemingly evident power. In addition, in closed societies such as the ones which employ totemism, religion is universal, meaning that everyone has the same belief system. The collectiveness ensued through the belief system creates a unity and spiritual bonds among the members of the clans. Lastly, Durkheim believed that individuals in closed societies really have no other options but to believe in the religion taught to or experienced by them from an early age. Durkheim also touched on the fact that the forbidden and the unknown play considerable roles in understanding the essence of religion. Because totemism possesses and even exemplifies Durkheim’s opinions of religion, in addition to standard definitions of religion, it is only fair to label it as being one.

A Research Study On Cancer Registry History - 1338 Words

Cancer Registry History A cancer registry is an information system that collects, maintains, storages, and analyses data on people with cancer. Cancer data is important to healthcare world. Physicians, researchers, legislators, medical students, epidemiologists, and public health planners rely on this data. Researchers need it to study possible causes of cancer and doctors need it to decide the best course of treatment for their patient. The major purposes are: †¢ to establish and maintain a cancer incidence reporting system; †¢ to be an informational resource for the investigation of cancer and its causes; and †¢ to provide information to assist public health officials and agencies in the planning and evaluation of cancer prevention and†¦show more content†¦(WellStar Cancer Network, 2015) Mailing Letters This process includes separating patient and doctor letters and placing them in the correct envelope. The purpose is to receive recent follow ups on patients who have or did have cancer. Procedure 1. Obtain letters from the appropriate employee. 2. Separate doctor letters from patient letters. a. Doctor letters will say â€Å"Dear Dr. Smith†. 3. Fold the letter hotdog style in half leaving about  ½ inch at top. 4. Fold the letter again leaving the â€Å"Dear __________† showing at the very bottom. 5. Obtain two envelopes for patient letters. a. Envelope that states â€Å"Follow Up Program. This is not a Bill†. b. Envelope that states â€Å"Oncology Data Center† with a stamp on the top right corner. 6. Obtain two envelopes for doctor letters. a. Envelope that states â€Å"Wellstar Kennestone Hospital† in the top left corner only. b. Envelope that states â€Å"Oncology Data Center† with no stamp in top right corner. 7. Place the patient and doctor letters in the appropriate envelope. 8. Verify the patient letters are in the patient envelopes and the doctor letters are in the doctor envelopes. 9. Place the letters in the mail room on the desk. Follow Ups The purpose of follow ups is to monitor the statuses of patients in the cancer registry. The American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer is to maintain a 90% follow up rate of