Lines composed upon Westminster bridge, Sept. 3 1802 and London Essay Example for Free

Lines composed upon Westminster bridge, Sept. 3 1802 and London Essay These two poems show very different views of London. Lines composed upon Westminster Bridge, written by William Wordsworth, describes London in detail. He captures the beautified city and expresses the calmness of the morning. William Blake, who lived around the same time, wrote London which expresses the chaotic and corrupt side of London. Wordsworth describes the city in much detail. A sight so touching in its majesty. The Earth has not anything to show more fair. He expresses his true feeling about the city from where he sees it. He goes on to personify the city and describe how it doth like a garment wear The beauty of the morning; silent, bare. He has captured the city in the morning when it is quiet and in a sense almost naked with no one yet bustling through the streets, there are no fume engulfed traffic jams or shouting street salesmen. There is only the calmness of the morning. All the man made objects and buildings, such as ships, towers, domes, theatres and temples lie open unto the fields and to the sky. The man built objects remain where they were left not yet being used by Londoners. The atmosphere is sublime, the sun is just rising and soaking everything in its light, Never did sun more beautifully steep Neer saw I, never felt, a calm so deep! the scene is so peaceful he is feeling peace within himself. The natural body of the city, the river, is gliding in its own free way, the way it wants the river glideth at its own sweet will Its free will is moving it naturally through the city as though it were the countryside. The river has also been personified to give more emphasis of its freedom. He is so overwhelmed by the atmosphere and calmness of the city. Dear God! The very houses seem asleep everywhere he sees is not yet awake, again he has personified an object to give it more emphasis. His final line is describing the city as a mighty heart that is lying still. The capital, like the giant mechanism of a heart is just lying still. The aim from the poem is to describe the amazement he sees when looking over a massive city and seeing the calmness. He wants to express to others how peaceful and calm it makes him feel and pass that feeling on to the reader. The first two stanzas describe what the city is like, and what he sees around him. The sestet after this shows his personal response to what he has already described and how he feels about the city. Blake presents a much more depressing, morbid scene of London describing the corruptness of everything in the city. He is describing the attitudes and goings on in London that are normally never spoken about, the things which people may or may not know but which go on behind closed doors. A lot of repetition is used, unlike in Wordsworths poem, to give emphasis to the points which he is trying to make. In every cry, of every Man, In every Infants cry of fear, In every voice he only lists one example in each line but gives the effect of a lot of crying and pain and fear. He speaks in a first hand account throughout the poem I wander, I hear, and I meet. By speaking in the present tense it makes the reader more inclined to think it is going on here and now however old the poem may be. By beginning the first line with I wander thro each chartered street It makes it easier to visualise what he is describing because it is a first hand account. The chartered streets are each set out neatly and ordered, the chartered Thames is also very regulated and gives the impression of it being divided and bought and sold. He notices a mark in every face I meet Marks of wisdom, marks of woe. This evidence of scars of weakness and great sadness in faces contrasts with the peaceful and happy atmosphere Wordsworth gave to London. He hears mind-forgd manacles in crys of every man and Infants cry of fear he is referring to the fake, made up manacles that he cannot actually hear but knows that something is wrong. His repetition of cry continues to the next stanza where he talks of chimney-sweepers which are doing the dirty, hardest jobs and suffering for their work, an example of the depressed and morbid London. The description of the blackening church shows the soot taking over London and the church becoming almost evil, involved with dirty money or becoming corrupt. Even the church is starting to lose its faith. Another large part of London life is also criticised, the hapless soldiers sigh Runs in blood down palace walls. Fighting is going on around the palace but going unnoticed, the palace is oblivious to the corruptness going on inside its own walls. He contrasts the third stanza with the 4th final stanza, not only the church and palace and the huge industries of London are corrupt the streets are also. Thro the midnight streets I hear How the youthful harlots curse there is a lot of prostitution going on in the streets of London but was something that wasnt spoken about. The STDs, or curses blasts the new born infants tear. Implying that prostitutes pass on STDs and then these in turn get passed on to the newborn babies of those who have any disease. Another example of a corrupt system in London, which now effects the innocent. And blights with plagues the marriage hearse. Sleeping with prostitutes while married destroys the whole point of marriage and then if the partner becomes pregnant another generation is born into corruption. The use of hearse shows how marriage is carried away as though dead and not taken seriously. The extremely regular meter helps put across the ordered ways he describes the beginning. These chartered and regulated ways soon give way to the examples of how corruption is slowly taking over the whole city, the government, the church, the palace and the streets. The first poem also used a regular meter, which, also worked well in describing the city peacefully and happily. The two poems contrast greatly in not what they describe but how they describe it. Wordsworth has a much more calming poem, which in effect leaves the reader much more calm and peaceful. This is unlike Blakes who describes so much evil and chaos going on, his poem leaves the reader much more depressed and almost disgusted with how the people and industries of London are behaving. Their use of language is also quite different, Wordsworths entire poem is full of description of beauty, bright and glittering and full of splendour. He uses very grand descriptions of everything unlike the descriptions of Blake, which are quite harsh and blunt, blasts the new born infants tear, blights with plagues and runs in blood down palace walls. I did enjoy both poems but preferred the first, Lines composed upon Westminster because of its use of more soothing, happy descriptions of London. It made me feel much more relaxed after reading it whereas London left me feeling slightly more depressed and sad. Although this may have been the aim of Blakes poem I preferred Wordsworths poem because it was much calmer.

Trinity of Beliefs Essay -- essays research papers

We study different religious faiths in order to understand other people. Many people have strong religious convictions, and it would be impossible to understand them without first understanding their faith. Which is why when studying the early Western World the religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, which are all closely related, are examined. All three of these religions are Western, they are monotheistic, and together they form the Abramic religions. Judaism is the oldest, dating from around 2000 BC and the most ancient religion still practiced in today's society; Christianity originates from shortly after the death of Jesus Christ; Islam is the youngest, emerging in the seventh century AD. It would appear, then, that Christianity and Islam are descended from Judaism, as different interpretations of the same beliefs. A possible hypothesis is that Christianity and Islam are adaptations of the old monotheistic religion in accordance with the political and social climates of t he times in which they emerged. All three religions share the same ancient history. The importance of Adam, Abraham, Moses and David and many others detailed in the Old Testament, is agreed on by all three religions; however, their view of Jesus' place in the scheme of things is the first major disagreement. The Christians believe him to be the Messiah, which the Jews had waited for for so long, while the Jews and Muslims believe him to be a great prophet and find the claim that he is the Son of God to be blasphemous. This difference of opinion was the chief reason for the bloody break up of the relationship between the Jews and the Christians. At their first emergence the Christians were considered a sect of the Jewish faith by both themselves and other Jews. However, the relationship between the different sects and the rest of the Jewish community became increasingly problematic as Jesus' teachings were considered blasphemous by the Romans. Jesus' all embracing theories and disregard for Jewish law made his movement all the more loathsome to the Jews. This is the primary reason for the stormy relationship between the two religions that were once one; the second reason is due to the manner in which the sect broke away and become a religion in it's own right. This breakaway began with the increasing rejection of Jewish law, for example, of the dietary customs, and when an Emperor... ...ar, even fashionable belief around the Roman Empire at this time, and paganism was fast becoming the religion of the ignorant. However, the diversity of the cultures and pre-existing beliefs in this area meant that not everybody could accept Judaism and the laws and customs that came with it as their single religion. This made sects necessary, and there were a great number of these; Christianity and Islam were the most popular and enduring of them. In today's society, Christianity claims the largest percentage of the world's population, while Islam is the second largest faith. Therefore, although historically Judaism shares a very close relationship with Christianity and Islam, its two main sects have now overtaken it as the world's most popular religions. Today, if a non-Jew, a non-Muslim and a non-Christian came together and examined their faiths, they would find no real faults between them. However, ask any Jew, Muslim or Christian and they will tell you a lot of conflicting b eliefs between the faiths. When, in truth, the faiths are basically one faith all connected in roots, prophets, and beliefs and its not the faiths that are in conflict, but the people of those very faiths.

Diet: Obesity and Dieting Essay

Dieting Makes You Fat The weight-loss industry is swelling as quickly as our waistlines at the moment, which seems something of a paradox. If body-conscious consumers are so happy to buy dieting products, why are we facing an obesity crisis? The truth is, no calorie-controlled diet works; if it did, dieting professionals could kiss repeat business goodbye. Even worse: Restricting what you eat will make you fat. Worse still: Yo-yo dieting can cause depression, high blood pressure and high cholesterol levels. Frequent dieters are 60 percent more likely to die from heart disease than people who don’t starve themselves. The weight-loss successes trumpeted on the front of slimming magazines contradict this. They tell the stories of women (it usually is women) who have lost a lot of weight by following a diet that restricts calorie intake. As the pictures show, these women have clearly not been made fat by following such regimes. This, though, is only part of the complex dieting jigsaw, as Geoffrey Cannon explains in his book Dieting Makes You Fat. Yes, if you consume less energy than your body burns off in a day, your weight will drop. But Cannon, a public health adviser and nutrition expert, looks longer-term and says that nearly all dieters are forced to turn to drugs, surgery, further dieting or exercise to maintain that initial weight loss. If the title of the book rings a bell, it is possible you read Cannon’s earlier book of the same name, which he wrote 25 years ago. Conclusive new scientific evidence to support the claims in the first book, a global public health crisis caused by obesity and its attendant illnesses, and a booming diet industry prompted Cannon to completely rewrite this text. Dieting Makes You Fat was groundbreaking a quarter of a century ago, but its message is perhaps even more urgent today. As people are getting fatter (a government report from 2007 predicted that by 2050 most British adults will be obese), the market for weight-loss products is growing. The dieting industry in the United States is worth $46 billion a year; in Europe it is worth a‚ ¬93 billion. Clearly, our appetite for losing weight is not matched by our capacity to actually shed fat. Why did we not take Cannon’s advice the first time round? When people are skeptical of dieting regimes, they will say that diets don’t work,† he explains. â€Å"But they always stop short of saying that dieting makes you fat, which is a concept with explosive implications. † He points to scientific studies that illustrate how the dieting trap leads to weight gain. A 2007 UCLA review concluded: â€Å"We found that the majority of people regained all the weight, plus more. †¦ Most of them would have been better off not going on the diet at all. † Further evidence came from an experiment in a closed-off ecosystem in Arizona in the early ’90s. Eight scientists had agreed to live inside the man-made biosphere for two years. Once inside, they discovered they were unable to grow enough food but agreed to diet for the two years and continue with the experiment. They all dropped about 9 kilograms before their weights stabilized. Within six months of leaving the biosphere, they had piled the weight back on, and — crucially — almost of all of it was fat, not the lean tissue they had started out with. Not only does dieting make you fat, it makes you flabby, too. â€Å"Throughout history, humans have evolved and adapted to survive famine and starvation,† explains Cannon. The people who survived were the people who were best able to, those who had their larders inside themselves, in the form of body fat. A dieting regime will fail because you’re training your body to survive famine and starvation better. † Cannon takes pains to dilute the science in Dieting Makes You Fat and includes just one table in the whole book, which looks at the difference between the energy our bodies burn at different weights and with different body compositions — whether lean (physically fit but not necessarily light) or fat (not necessarily heavy, but with a high proportion of body fat to lean tissue). A lean woman who weighs 70 kilograms (154 pounds) burns 600 calories more at rest per day than a woman who weighs the same but has a lot of body fat. What, then, is the answer to losing weight, if diets are out? Cannon, without subscribing to the misconception that a thin person is, by definition, a healthy person and fat people are likewise unhealthy, says there are a lot of people out there who need to lose a lot of weight. He writes from experience, having jumped on the dieting wagon at a young age himself. When he realized that the diets he tried were ineffective, he set about proving why. Dieting Makes You Fat proposes seven golden rules for losing weight, the most salient being to get a lot of exercise and eat plenty of fresh, whole foods. Cannon admits that his approach takes six or seven months before positive results are seen, but he insists that it is what’s needed for people to dig their bodies out of the dieting trap.

Antigone vs a Raisin in the Sun Essay

While Antigone by Sophocles and A Raisin in the Sun by Lorraine Hansberry are very difference stories they have many similarities. Antigone is the about daughter of Oedipus trying to do what she believes is good. Her brothers have killed each other and while one gets a proper burial, the other is left to be eaten by wild animals. The reason he is not allowed to be buried is because King Creon believes he is unworthy of it. The main character Antigone defies Creon’s law and buries her brother anyways which upsets the king and he locks her up and puts her in jail. His son Haemon, as it turns out, is Antigone’s soon to be husband. He does not agree with Creon’s tactics, but doesn’t do anything to go against him at first. Over time, Creon still does not have any intention of letting Antigone go nor does he think that he is wrong. A prophet comes to him and tells him he should probably let Antigone go unless he wants to live a miserable life. He still does not let her go, and it ends up that she kills herself. Haemon sees this, and also kills himself. Lastly, his wife Eurydice is so distraught that she kills herself, and Creon is left all alone. A Raisin in the Sun is about a poor black family that suddenly inherits a good sum of money because the family’s father died. Mama, the mother of the household, wants to get a house of their very own which happens to be in a white neighborhood. Beneatha, the young student of the family, wants to use the money for her education. Walter, Mama’s only son and Ruth’s husband, wants to invest the money in a liquor store. Over the course of the play they are met with racists, liars, and snobs who conflict with the main characters. After all the hardships they eventually still move into the house. These two very different stories have similar and different themes, situations, symbols and characters. Antigone and A Raisin in the Sun have a lot of similarities. The burial in Antigone symbolizes the love for her family. The prophet symbolizes the fate of the family. Ruth symbolizes the hardships of motherhood. The money symbolizes the father, and the future goals of the family. Both stories have symbols that have to do with family. A symbol is something that stands for itself and something greater than itself, and both stories use people as symbols, acts that people do as symbols, and objects as symbols. Walter: [W]e have decided to move into our house because my father—my father—he earned it for us brick by brick. † Fathers in the family are very important to each of the characters. Both Creon and Walter want respect as a father. The main female protagonists in each story are similar too. They are strong independent women that stand up for what they believe in. While Bennie wants to get in touch with her African roots, Antigone wants to bury her brother. Other people doubt these female heroes, but in the end they follow their hearts. The theme of pride is also evident in both of the stories. Creon and Walter’s pride is the downfall of both of them. Walter is too prideful to admit that maybe his get rich quick schemes are not what the family should be doing with the money. Creon’s pride makes it so that he cannot just let Antigone go and ends up killing everyone he holds close. The situations that the characters in the stories go through have some similar situations also. Both have the situation of losing a loved one before any action takes place. In Antigone we don’t get to know the actual brother that is being buried but he is a big part of the play. Same thing goes for A Raisin in the Sun, where we don’t really know much about the deceased father, though all the main characters miss him. For plays that are so widely different, there are many similarities. Even though there are similarities, there are many differences between the two plays. For one thing, no one actually dies in A Raisin in the Sun. It is not a tragedy like Antigone is and thus, it is way less tragic. â€Å"My nails are broken, my fingers are bleeding, my arms are covered with the welts left by the paws of your guards—but I am a queen! † No way would this appear in A Raisin in the Sun. While Antigone is a greek tragedy written before the birth of Christ, the other story takes place in Chicago in the 1950’s. While the character Antigone goes to great lengths to ensure her brother’s burial, she does not take into account how her sister Ismene will be affected, or how her future marriage might be terminated. The characters in A Raisin in the Sun are much more thoughtful of each other and want the money to be used to help everyone in the family. Antigone does not have any money problems because she was the king’s daughter and all her money issues are taken care of. While she does not have any money issues, it does not mean in any way that her life is more fortunate. One of the prevailing themes of this play is the nature of tragedy. No matter what happens we know that it is doomed to fail because of the nature of the play. At least when reading A Raisin in the Sun we hope that the Youngers have everything turn out all right. The theme in that story is about dreams and much more relatable. In conclusion, Antigone and A Raisin in the Sun have many similarities and differences. The symbols in the story greatly vary in many aspects while they still have something to do with family. The characters Antigone and Bennie are alike while Creon and Walter are also alike. There are many different themes in both stories but love, family, and pride are alike in both of them. The conflicts in the story do not have very much in common which makes it more out of the ordinary that they have similar symbols, characters and themes. It is interesting how two greatly varying stories can have so much in common even though they were written by very different people.

Capitalism vs. Communism Essays - Socialism, Economic Ideologies

Capitalism vs. Communism Essays - Socialism, Economic Ideologies Mrs. Rogers Period 1 May 7, 2013 Capitalism vs. Communism Throughout history, there has been two major economic systems, these are Capitalism and Communism. There has been argument to which form will benefit and flourish the country more. Communism was first presented by Karl Marx, in the mid 1800's due to the problem of seeing that a countries wealth was unevenly distributed to its' people, while Capitalism is the more dominant system, it has originated in Europe and has spread throughout the majority of the world. The United States included has adopted the system of Capitalism and has practiced it since the 1900's. Although several super-power countries have adopted communism, capitalism remains the favorable, but both economic systems has its own pros and cons. Capitalism has several key features that define it and that sets it apart from communism. It has great differences compared to communism, because in a capitalism economic system, the market system is controlled the people. The production of goods, and distribution of wealth and goods in an economy is based by the private companies or the people, and is not strictly controlled by the government. Economic activity is also influenced by the buyers and sellers in the economy, and owners of the land and capital are free to pursue their own self-interest, and they are also given sovereignty. Self-interest also drives the economic, and government interference is minimal compared to a communism system. Competition in a capitalism system is what drives the system to be successful, and due to our freedom in the economic system, the countries economical state is self-regulated by its citizens. In a capitalism system, the person determines their place in society. Their hard work and initiative c an be the key to their role in society, while also focusing in the progress of their own life. Some people achieve more goals than others because they make use of their skill better in a capitalism system, where in a communism, a person investing less time than another person at the same labor is guaranteed the same result. Communism introduces a system, where everyone is equal. Communism implements the idea, that everyone in the society is subject to equal wealth and place in their society. It has the potential to be a successful system, but the way communism has been used in the past is wrong. Under communism, people are receiving the same property and income with the different labor they have completed. This type of economy can discourage people to their best, unlike in a capitalism system. This lack of encouragement can deeply affect the growth of an economy, and it can discourage people to do their best and beyond due to the fact that no matter how much effort they invest, they will receive the same wealth and place in society than someone who is invested very little. The government's role in communism is great, they strictly control production of any goods being produced in the economy. They also control and can fluctuate the resources and production of certain goods. While communism can be a symb ol for abolishing private property, capitalism can stand for private property. Communism also stands for a classless society, in where everyone sees each other as an equal and where there is no rich and there is no poor, unlike in a capitalism system, the performances of an individual determines their class in society and determines. Both systems are unique in their own way. Throughout history, it has been proven that Capitalism is the more dominant system over Communism. The majority of the countries in the world adopted capitalism, while communist were practiced in some countries, it is starting to collapse. The flaws of both systems is clear, while communism leaves no one behind, it can withheld growth of the economy, but in a capitalism system it will flourish but may leave people behind. In a communism system, the society is above individuals, but for capitalism, individual freedom is above the state or society and the great divide provided in capitalism, will be nowhere to be found in communism. Page "Capitalism."Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 05 July 2013. Web. 07 May 2013. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism Communist State Wikipedia, Web. 07 May 2013 "History of Communism."Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 05 Apr. 2013. Web. 07 May

Analysing The Effects Of Ddt Environmental Sciences Essay

Analysing The Effects Of Ddt Environmental Sciences Essay DDT is a white, solid, crystalline powder with no taste or odor. DDT (C14H9C15) is derived from reaction between chloral and chlorobenzene in presence of fumes of sulfuric acid. DDT is insoluble in water and it is soluble in organic solvents such as, fats and oils. DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) is an organochlorine pesticide widely used to control mosquito and insects that carry diseases like malaria, typhus, and other harmful diseases and pest in agriculture (Martin, 2008; Raghavendra et al., 2010). DDT was banned in the U.S. in 1972 because it was identified to cause damage in birds and other wildlife, but it is still used in some developing countries (Bhuiyan et al., 2008). It is still present in environment due to current use in other countries. DDT and its breakdown products (DDE and DDD) can easily break down by sunlight, but they are very hard to dissolve in soil. DDE (dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) and DDD (dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) are two major metabolites and breakdown products of DDT. DDD was also known as pesticide, but it was banned whereas DDE does not have any commercial use (Eskenazi et al., 2009). DDT was first synthesized in 1874 by Othmar Zeidler. In 1940, DDT was first used to treat Dutch elm disease. DDT was majorly used in World War II to protect troop and civilians from diseases. In 1939, Paul Mueller discovered DDT as insecticide and he won the Nobel Prize in 1948 for it. After this, people started using DDT as pesticide for their home, agriculture purpose and in gardens (Eskenazi et al., 2008). However, DDT started to cause diseases during this time and this increases public concern to Rachel Carsonà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s Silent Spring. Rachel Carsonà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s Silent Spring was published in 1962, which contains environmental impacts of DDT in the US (ATSDR, 2002; Eskenazi et al., 2008; Martin, 2008). DDT is strongly absorbed by soil and remains there for long period of time (Bhuiyan et al., 2008). They released f rom soil by various types of reactions such as, runoff, photolysis, aerobic and anaerobic biodegradation and volatilization (van den Berg, 2009). In surface water, DDT will bind to particles that are present in the water and sediments. DDT is taken up by small organisms and fish from the water and then bioaccumulate in organisms to higher trophic levels. DDT deposited into the adipose tissues and fats in organisms. DDT shows bioaccumulation and biomagnification as it has lypophilic property (Bhuiyan et al., 2008). In 1950s, first evidence of DDT toxicity in bald eagles, robins, osprey, pelicans, peregrine falcon, and fish-eating mammals was observed (Xiao et al., 2008; DDT: An Introduction, 1996; Martin, 2008). Objectives This paper has five objectives: (1) To discuss the sources and main causes of DDT; (2) To discuss its mechanism of action as insecticide or pesticide; (3) To discuss the health problems and toxicological effects associated with DDT; (4) To discuss the environmental impacts of DDT; (5) To discuss control measures and various methods of dealing with DDT sources and problems. DDT in the Environment DDT is not soluble in water but it can form strong bonding with soil particles. DDT is still present in environment in soils that were exposed to DDT during earlier time. DDT is a volatile so it can be transported and evaporated as a gas. DDT is not commonly found in groundwater because it is less soluble in water and it will more likely to bound with soil particles rather than water molecule (ATSDR, 2002; Walker, M., Powell, P., 2003; van den Berg, 2009).

Determinism, Compatiblism, and Libertarianism Research Paper

Determinism, Compatiblism, and Libertarianism - Research Paper Example I will divide my paper into four main parts. Part one will be devoted to an analysis of determinism. I shall use Paul Holbach’s version of this position. In contrast to part one, part two will tackle the libertarian position. Here I shall use Roderick Chisholm’s version. And part three will discuss the compatibilist view on free will. In doing so, I shall use A. J. Ayer’s version. Finally, I will show the main strengths and weaknesses of each. I will conclude my paper by giving an explanation on why I think compatibilism is the most feasible and practical among all three. Determinism: Everything Has A Cause Determinism is the view that rests on the assumption that everything has a cause. â€Å"All doctrines of determinism imply that given the past and the laws of nature at any given time, there is only one possible future. Whatever happens is therefore inevitable† (Kane 285). What does this imply? It simply implies that â€Å"we could not have chosen othe rwise† (Feinberg and Shafer-Landau 410). To illustrate this position further, I will explore Paul Holbach’s version of hard-determinism. Holbach says that we are not free. But how does he argue for this position? The main claim of determinism is that â€Å"whatever happens is determined by prior events† (Sie 2). Holbach is a hard determinist. ... But if my action is determined by past events, then I'm unable to act otherwise. Therefore, I don’t ever act freely. One can argue that it is not the case that I don’t act freely for I have my own motives, choices and I am not restrained. However, Holbach refutes this on the basis of â€Å"the complexity of human conduct and the illusion of free agency† (Holbach 463). Holbach argues, we only think we are free because we cannot explain the phenomena, but in principle, we can explain everything by explaining its causes (463). For instance, if I can explain my actions through the laws of nature then we have no use for free will anymore. So if we discover the cause of a given phenomena, then it nullifies freedom. Therefore, we are not free. Contrary to determinism is the libertarian position. I shall discuss Chisholm’s version of libertarianism next. Libertarianism: some of our actions are free Libertarianism argues that some events that happen are not determi ned by prior events. In defending freewill, Chisholm suggests: We must not say that every event involved in the act is caused by some other event; and we must not say that the act is something that is not caused at all. The possibility that remains, therefore, is this: We should say that at least one of the events that are involved in the act is caused, not by any other events, but by something else instead. And this something else can only be the agent—the man (440). Given Chisholm’s suggestion, I can say that my action-A is free if and only if I am the cause of A and that I could have done another action-B other than A. If determinism is true, I could not have done B. But I could have done B because I am the cause of my actions. My decision to do A caused me to perform A,