Platos Allegory Of The Cave: Importance Today

Platos Allegory Of The Cave: Importance Today Our society so values education that sociologists have recognized the problem of over-education (Hadjicostandi). Many people are spending years pursuing degrees which they simply do not need for the jobs they perform. It is therefore prudent for students to question whether pursuing a liberal education is really as important as our society believes. What is the point of a college education? Does it have any purpose beyond its material benefits. Are these benefits worth their cost? These are important questions that need answering. In the end, we may see that there is far more to this debate than simple accounting. Perhaps what makes education worth pursuing is that it gives us the freedom to makes these kinds of decisions about what is best for us. In many ways, this debate over education has its roots in the writings of Plato (Jowett). In Book VII of The Republic, Plato discusses such topics as enlightenment, epistemology, forms, and the duties of philosophers Allegory of the Cave vs The Matrix: Imagine living through life completely bound and facing a reality that doesnt even exist. The prisoners in Platos Allegory of the Cave are blind from true reality as well as the people in the movie The Matrix written and directed by the Wachowski brothers. They are given false images and they accept what their senses are telling them, and they believe what they are experiencing is all that really exists. Plato the ancient Greek philosopher wrote The Allegory of the Cave, to explain the process of enlightenment and what true reality may be. In the movie The Matrix, Neo (the main character) was born into a world of illusions called the matrix. His true reality is being controlled by the puppet- handlers called the machines who use the human body as a source of energy. In the movie, Neo, finds and alternate reality and he has to go on a journey to discover himself and what is around him. Much like The Allegory of the Cave the prisoners in a dark underground cave, who are chained to the wall, have a view of reality solely based upon this limited view of the cave which is but a poor copy of the real world. Both the prisoners of the cave, and Neo from the Matrix, have to transcend on the path of enlightenment to know the truth of their own worlds. The Allegory of the Cave in Different Perspectives The Allegory of the Cave, written by Plato, is an interpretation of a conversation between Socrates, Platos mentor, and Glaucon, one of Socrates students.  ¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ §The Allegory of the Cave ¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¨ can be interpreted several different ways. Imagine men in a cave chained up by their necks and legs, forcing them to only look forward at a wall. An opening behind them lets the light in. Above the burning fire and chains, there is a road. Have these chained men ever seen anything else of themselves or others beyond the cave ¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¦s shadows made by the fire? Some people would say the truth is only perceived by the shadows seen on the walls of the cave. What if one of these men ¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¦s chains were taken off and he was free to leave? Would the man feel pain when seeing the real world? Would he be confused on believing what is real? Would it make a difference if the chained man was briefly educated about what he was going to see first? Perhaps he would understand and not be confused about what is real. Will the man think what he saw before was much more real than what he sees now? Questions like these will bring different opinions and meaning to The Allegory of the Cave. ¨ Whose interpretation, if any, is correct when explaining the meaning of The Allegory of the Cave? Does it have mathematical meaning, explain a vision of the whole world, or is it just a comparison to the field of social work? Similarities between Platos and Descartes Epistemologies Summary Philosophy is a subject that can take many twists and turns before it finds an answer to a general question. Sometimes, an answer is still left unfound. Philosophy, in its broadest terms, can be described as the systematic pursuit of knowledge and human excellence. What we are concerned with is knowledge. Many people have theories of knowledge. Amongst them, there are two we will be looking at, Descartes and Plato. We will examine Descartes epistemology in Meditations on First Philosophy and Platos in The Republic. Descartes epistemology is known as foundationalism. In the Meditations, Descartes doubts everything he was taught to believe because it is human tendency to believe what is false. In the first, he claims that most of what he believes is from his senses and that those senses are sometimes deceived. His solution to doubting everything is compared to a basket of apples. You fear that some apples have gone bad and you dont want the others to rot, so you throw all the apples out of the basket. Once this is done, you examine each one and return the good apples to the basket. This is what he does with his beliefs. He keeps only those he is certain of. We must discard our beliefs as a whole and then examine each one individually. We must build on the good beliefs. Descartes, however, does realize we cant throw every belief out because they are a part of us, unlike the apples. We would have no basis for recovering any of our beliefs. We would be unable to justify anything. No belief based on sense-perception is free from doubt. He said it is possible that his life is all a dream and he is being deceived into thinking it is reality. He also holds false anything that is physical exists, including his own body. The only things we should trust are those beliefs that are subject to rational scrutiny. We must also declare our mathematical judgments to be false also because an evil demon might be deceiving us. Now, Descartes has cast doubt on all his beliefs about everything but himself. He cannot be deceived about himself. It is on himself that he will be able to rebuild his knowledge of other things. If he had no knowledge of himself, then nothing can be certain. If he doubts, he must be an existing self which is engaged in doubting. If he doubts, he must also be thinking and Descartes said I think, therefore I am. He must also exist so that he can be deceived. If he is dreaming, then he is also thinking, thus he still exists. This is the first step to acquiring knowledge, to Descartes. You must build on what you know is certain, starting with yourself as the foundation. In the second meditation, Descartes tries to show we know bodies through reason and not through senses. He uses a piece of wax to demonstrate. Over a period of time, a freshly produced piece of wax placed by the fire loses or changes all its specific properties, yet it is known to be the same object. Its taste and odor disappear. Its color, size, and shape are completely transformed. It loses its hardness and coldness to liquidity and warmth. To know the wax, you must be able to anticipate its changes. Descartes argues, though, that the imagination could not possibly figure out all conditions, for they are infinite. One can only know an object through understanding, rather than through images, sensation or imagination. He now has knowledge about himself and any object that he has thought about through reason. We are now moving along nicely in rebuilding our house of knowledge. In the third meditation, we move into another building block of knowledge, God. We look at the example of two plus three equaling five. We see this to be clear and distinct, but it is possible that we are being deceived. He tries to dispel the doubt about propositions of mathematics by claiming that God exists and would not allow such a deception. He makes an argument for Gods existence. Premise one states that we have an idea of God. Premise two states that the only way to have an idea of God is if God exists. Therefore, the conclusion is that God exists. Us having an idea of God means us having an understanding of the infinite. We cant understand the infinite through the finite, but only through the infinite, thus God must also be the cause of the idea of God. We as finite substances cannot cause the existence of an infinite substance. The idea is also an objective reality, thus it can be held as true. God is not deceiving us and now we have added the final building block to our ho use of knowledge. In The Republic, Plato has his own epistemology. His is more along the lines of idealism. The ascent to knowledge is not based upon understanding an object, but understanding the idea of that object. The highest idea or form is the idea of the Good itself. Socrates is the main character of this section of The Republic. He engages in a conversation with Glaucon about knowledge. Socrates gives two images of the ascent from chaotic opinion to orderly knowledge, the image of the divided line and of the Cave. Knowledge is what is certain and true and opinion is what is fallible. This is where we may see a connection between Plato and Descartes. They both agree that knowledge must be certain and all other things false. Plato held that all knowledge can be derived from a single set of principles. Knowledge rests on the Good as its foundation, unlike Descartes, where ones self is the foundation. Plato compares the power of the Good to the power of the sun. The sun illuminates things and makes them visible to the eye. The absolute good illuminates things of the mind and makes them intelligible. According to Plato, the idea of the Good is too much for humans to understand, but can be thought of as the idea of absolute order. The sun is the cause of generation, nourishment, growth, and visibility. The Good is the cause of essences, structures, forms, and knowledge. This is somewhat similar to Descartes because God is the cause of the idea of Himself, thus the cause of everything else also. There are four levels of knowledge. First, there are two ruling powers though. The good is set over the intellectual world and the sun over the visible world. We start with two lines, one for knowledge and one for opinion. Now we cut them once more and now there are four sections, two belonging to the intelligible world and two belonging to the visible world, two belonging to knowledge and two belonging to opinion. The first section is that of images such as shadows and reflections. The second deals with us seeing actual things, sense-perception. Unlike Descartes, we will not discard this, but use it to build on our knowledge. Descartes believes sense-perception to be false, but Plato uses it as a stepping stone towards knowledge. Now we have the two subdivisions of the intellectual. The third section is where the soul has understanding through its assumptions based on images. The fourth section is where the soul moves past the use of any images and strictly reasons things out. One d oes not use objects, but ideas to reason. Next is the Allegory of the Cave. Platos allegory is a copy of the reality of the divided line. Plato realizes people can think and speak without being aware of the Forms. Plato treats these people as prisoners chained in a cave, unable to turn their heads. All they are able to see is the wall of the cave and a fire burns behind them. There is a place to walk between the prisoners and the fire. There are others in that place that hold up objects to cast shadows on the wall of the cave. The prisoners are unable to see these objects behind them. They see and hear only the shadows and echoes cast by these objects. Prisoners like these would mistake appearance for reality. They would think the shadows are real, but would be unaware of the causes. Plato points out that they would refer to the shadow rather than the real object. The only way for the prisoner to see what he is talking about is to turn his head around. We actually name things we can not see, but things that we can only grasp in the mind. When the prisoners are released, they can see the real objects and realize their error. The way we can see the causes of our shadows is by grasping the Forms with our minds. The prisoners now ascend upwards out of the cave( into the intellectual world). When they first leave the cave, their eyes feel pain the same way the jury that convicted Socrates felt pain. They were not used to the light just like the jury was not used to Socrates manner of speaking. The prisoners would, at first, react violently as the jury did and try to descend back into the cave. This is similar to when the jury sentenced Socrates to death. But the prisoners must go on. Once they adjust, they are able to see the objects and what they must possess in itself. This takes us back to Descartes again. Descartes also believed we must look for an objects uniqueness without relying on sense-perception. The light shows them what the external conditions must be and then they finally see the sun, the sour ce of the external condition. Plato and Descartes have their own epistemologies. Platos is that of Idealism and Descartes is Foundationalism. They differ somewhat while they also share similarities. Plato says what we see are shadows, not the real objects. A philosopher is one who strives to see the object and what makes the object unique. Finally, the philosopher will be able to see the idea of the object. Descartes also aims to find the uniqueness of an object and the idea of it through reason, but his approach differs. He casts doubt on what he feels isnt certain and starts to rebuild his house of knowledge on what is, himself being the foundation. Plato is not necessarily looking to cast doubts on ones beliefs, but is trying to expand ones knowledge of it. Their ends are the same, try to reach the Good or God, but their means are different.

Iconoclasm and Iconophilia in Othello :: Othello Essays

Iconnoclasm and Iconophilia in Othello In his book War Against the Idols, Carlos Eire argues that iconoclastic resistance to the Medieval Catholic Church began with the gentle scolding of Erasmus and ended as the "shibboleth" of radical Calvinism.1 The use of images in religious instruction and practice was one of the major points of dispute between Protestant reformers and Catholic counter-reformers. Iconoclasm was certainly not confined to radical Calvinism; Anglican reformers, especially those who had spent time in continental Europe as exiles (like John Jewel, Bishop of Salisbury), quickly raised the issue in their country, which had its own unique history of religious reform. The discussions of image and idolatry in Calvin and Jewel represent particular theories of the image that derive from but also revise ancient Platonic theories of the image. Reformation iconoclasm brings up issues of ontology (who or what is God?), epistemology (by what means are we to know him? can he be represented to human senses?), and ethics (how does knowledge of God translate into moral action?). Protestant iconoclasts tend to emphasize the epistemological worth (or rather, worthlessness) of religious imagery, while the Catholic iconophiles emphasize the positive moral effects to be derived from the use of images in religious instruction. Although sparked in the 1520's and 30's, the debate between iconoclasts and iconophiles raged throughout the latter sixteenth century, well into Shakespeare's time. The iconoclastic writings of Zwingli and Calvin had a powerful legacy throughout Europe. Calvin's collected Institutes of the Christian Religion was published in 1559. Perhaps spurred by theological arguments like Calvin's, violent stripping of church imagery and other popular agitation over idolatry took place in Switzerland and elsewhere on the continent. In England, John Jewel's dialogues with Dr. Harding on the subject of imagery, drawing very much on Calvin's arguments, were published in 1565 and again in 1611. During the English Reformation, the churches and monasteries of England were also stripped of their images by some Protestant objectors. It is clear that iconoclasm was an issue not only for elite churchmen--it also captured the hearts and minds of the general population, who were the audience of Shakes peare's theater. The problem of the image is traced, by many Protestant theologians, to several major scriptural conflicts. The first important reference is God's pronouncement in Genesis: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (Gen.

Essay --

â€Å"Lincoln Issues the Emancipation Proclamation† Out of all the documents signed throughout history in attempt to benefit our country, Abraham Lincoln felt that his document, Emancipation Proclamation, was most important. On January 1, 1763, approaching the third year of the very bloody civil war, President Abraham Lincoln released the Proclamation which declared â€Å"that all persons held as slaves† within the rebellious states, â€Å" are, and henceforward shall be free†(U.S National Archives & Records Administration). However, this only applied to the states that had been labeled as being rebellion, not to the slaveholding border states of Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, Missouri, and the areas that the Confederacy had already come under the Union Control. Abraham Lincoln released the document at the right time to ensure that it would make a positive impact and change completely, the aim of the war. To this day, the Emancipation Proclamation shows an example of equality and cognizance (Weider History Group, n.p). In August of 1861, during the Civil War, Congress had passed their first Confiscation Act of many. Confiscation is known as the seizing of someone's property without authority. The act was used against any property, which included slaves as well, used in the rebellion against the U.S government (Weider History Group, n.p). Union major general, John C. Fermont, Commander of the Department of the West, had issued an order which declared martial law in Missouri, as well as freeing all slave states that were held by Missouri secessionists (Weider History Group, n.p). Lincoln had ordered Fermont to change the order to conform the First Confiscation Act, in fear that it might link abolition with the war that could cause the slave... ...rmies, at that point didn’t have to be returned due to the words of the proclamation. They were considered, â€Å"forever free† (Weiders History Guide, n.p). The main reason President Lincoln had issued the Emancipation Proclamation mainly as a war measure. The biggest impact that was made off of this document was how for the first time, it placed U.S government against â€Å"peculiar institution†, which placed a barrier between the South, and the recognition by the European nations which outlawed slavery (Weider History Group, n.p). The south relied on aid from France and England. In many articles within the Confederate States’ Constitution, slavery had only been protected in the Confederacy, but in other articles of the U.S Constitution, it also stated that it protected slavery. The Emancipation Proclamation made a vivid distinction of the two (Weider History Group, n.p).

Free Hamlet Essays: Weak and Pitiful Hamlet :: The Tragedy of Hamlet Essays

Weak and Pitiful Hamlet  Ã‚   Hamlet lead his life in circles, never comfortable enough with his current conditions to settle down. The crisis’ placed upon him were never resolved, because he couldn’t handle decisions, leading to a severe downfall in his family’s life. Such demise began in a terrace of the palace Hamlet called home, with a sighting of a ghost that foreshadowed troubles in the near future. Hamlet’s sanity began to deteriorate when learned that his father’s death was not an accident, but rather a foul deed committed by the newly crowned King of Denmark. â€Å"If thou didst ever thy dear father love – Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder† [Act I, v l .23-25]. As a mysterious ghost appeared in the terrace, Hamlet learned of a murderer that would prove his fealty towards his father. As he contemplated the appalling news recently brought to his attention, the control Hamlet had over his actions was questioned. â€Å"O villain, villain, smiling, damned villain! My tables meet it is I set it down, That one may smile, and smile, and be a villain. At least I am sure it may be so in Denmark,† [Act I, v l. 106-109]. Hamlet’s hatred toward his father’s killer caused him to relate the tribulations between murder and the aspects of Denmark as a country together. As with most of the conflicts Hamlet faced, his lack of ability to avenge his father’s death, furthered the deterioration of his life and surroundings. With countless opportunities neglected, Hamlet’s ability to take any action against his father’s death is questioned. â€Å"Now might I do it pat, now ‘a is a-praying, and now I’ll do’t. And so ‘a goes to heaven, And so am I revenged. That would be scanned. A villain kills my father, and for that I, his sole son, do this same villain send To heaven.† [Act III, iii l. 173-180] Hamlet contemplates killing Cladius while he prayed for forgiveness, but then backed out as he learned he’ll send him to heaven for the loyalty Cladius showed towards the Lord. Hamlet once again debates the possibilities put before him by the ghost he swore to avenge. â€Å"To be, or not to be – that is the question: Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune Or to take arms against a sea of troubles And by opposing end them.

How do terrorist organizations succeed

Terrorism seeks to unify their population to the goal objectives and principles to stop hangs being caused by the government or outsiders or to institute their values and culture. Some terrorist groups based on religion like AH Qaeda have clear stated goals like driving out IIS troops or the destruction of another country that is not of their religion, like Israel. Attacks on property and using tampering hoaxes to cause expensive recalls of some products in the US is terrorism hitting at a target group economically.Terrorist groups may have more limited objectives that guide their actions or which they seek to achieve. These shorter term goals, of course, could aid the group in terms of achieving longer term objectives, and consider its performance to be successful if they simply survive to continue to pursue their longer term goals (Hoffman, 2002, p. 31 1 Just the perception that violence can work is enough as long as groups believe that such-?even if they are wrong-?they will be te mpted to adopt the technique in pursuance of their goals (Lutz, 2014, p. 17). Sing the information above of current terrorist activities a comparison to Strategic Quality Management may reveal why terrorist organizations succeed. There are five main variables in SUM with many parts, Purpose, Principles, Processes, People, and Performance. Five Up's of Terrorism Purpose: to pursue an objective through some form of violence to induce fear in an opponent. Terrorism requires some degree of secrecy in its preparation, as the inducement of fear is typically predicated on the element of surprise, but once the organization strikes public exposure is desired. Reminisces: As funny as this is going to sound the intellectual roots Of terrorism lie in three philosophical ideas which, ironically, are peculiarly Western: popular sovereignty, self-determination and ethical consequentiality (Phillips, 2014). Processes: Various strategies that may include political and reformist actions, cultural str uggle, strengthening of the community of believers, and through missionary work. If violence is not part this process it is not terrorism. People: Because anyone who believes in the principles and purpose of a terrorism group for whatever reason is why the group can be consistently effective.These people in their own working in their culture are not bad. It is very simple: if Robin Hood steals and keeps all the goodies, then it is a crime If Robin Hood steals from the rich and gives the goodies to the poor, then he would be a terrorist to one side and a hero to the other side. Performance: Performance is based on the purpose of each organization. From performance to purpose represents the feedback mechanism for guiding an organization toward their objectives (Prior, White, & Tombs, 2007, up. 1-5). With terrorist groups after action the objective may not be reached, but any results still works in their favor.

Miser to Man of the city in a Christmas Carol Essay

Scrooge is not very well like by the Cratchit’s. You can see this by â€Å"I wish I had him here. I’d give him a piece of my mind to feast upon and I hope he’d have a good appetite for it†. This shows that he is not liked because â€Å"he is an odious, stingy, hard, unfeeling man†. This make Scrooge feel bad and he learns a valuable lesson. Treat others as you wish to be treated. If he doesn’t want to be called bad tempered, money grabbing, old sinner, then we has to be caring and thoughtful. Scrooge every year at his nephew Fred’s house, is invited to a Christmas party, but always turns it down. Scrooge is not very well liked by the people at the party especially Fred. You can tell this by they invent a new game called â€Å"yes or no†. This shows that Scrooge is talked behind this back and that people do not care if they hurt his feeling. Scrooge feels unwanted and uncared for. You can tell this by â€Å"One half hour, Spirit, only one†. This shows that Scrooge has feeling and he wants to go as soon as possible because he crying and in great disbelief. Scrooge’s future looks uncertain when he goes into the future and sees him in a corner of the graveyard, unnoticed, uncared for. You can from this point that Scrooge is at the end of his tether. You can tell this by â€Å"For the first time his hand appeared to shake†. This shows that Scrooge has become more and more frightened and knows he must change his future to be cared for and missed dearly. He does not breakdown till this point because he can not change the past and that does not bother him. At the end of all the spirits visiting Scrooge is disappointed himself by being a selfish, lonely, old man. The Last straw is when he visits his own grave. He is already depressed with the entire trauma and another dig in his grave has made him tremble in fear. You can tell this by â€Å"The Spirit stood among the graves, and pointed down to one. He advanced towards it trembling†. This shows that Scrooge is scared of him and wants to change rather than just a person who has just died. Scrooge really wants to change because he doesn’t want to be the man in the corner that no one visits. You can tell this by â€Å"Are these the shadows of the things that will be, or are they the shadows of the things that may be, only†. This shows that Scrooge wants to change because of his experiences over the night. He wants to know that if he changes and mingles with people he will not die and nobody will care. He gets more and more distressed because the spirit won’t tell him if he can change his shadows of the future. You can tell this by â€Å"Assure me that I yet may change these shadows you have shown me, by an altered life†. He is on his knees, desperately trying to change his future. This tells us from this point onwards Scrooge will be a changed man to avoid distressing death. Scrooge wakes up the next morning a changed man, a generous man. You can tell this by â€Å"Scrooge regarded everyone with a delighted smile†. This shows that Scrooge has took into great account of what the spirits said and gone out to change his future. He is a changed man to the public. You can tell this by â€Å"If you please, ‘said Scrooge and not a farthing less. A great many back-payments are included in it, I assure you† This shows Scrooge as being as kind, thoughtful, caring man rather than a â€Å"squeezing, wrenching, grasping, scraping, clutching covetous old sinner†. Scrooge now respects the poor people more than ever, especially the Cratchit’s. You can tell this by â€Å"and therefore I am about to raise your salary†. This shows that Scrooge would rather share more of his money to make more people happy than just himself. This is different from the beginning because when the gentleman comes to visit he pushes him away and believes in â€Å"Laissez Faire†. Scrooge has now become a happier and more cheerful human being because he has changed his way of living. You can tell this by â€Å"they all sit around the table eating Christmas dinner†. This shows he is not self-contained, lonely old sinner, but a sociable character and because he changed his actions, Tiny Tim did live and Scrooge and his family say â€Å"God bless Us, Everyone! â€Å"

Why did a campaign for women’s suffrage develop in the years after 1870?

During the 19th century women were seen differently, through the eyes of the law, men and work. Most people believed that women should be passive ‘ladies'; obedient to their husbands and should stay at home. Married women's property was owned by their husbands and so was their financial, political and social power. Women didn't have similar rights as men did during the 19th century and this had started to get more and more noticed, by women, towards the 20th century. Women were put into three types of class systems, working class being the lowest, middle class, being the intermediate and rich class being the highest. A woman's husband's class would determine which class she would belong to. Most working class women were noticeable if they had a tan. The reason being is that working class women would have had to do the domestic work as well as earning money by working for an employer, usually at a very low pay, and this would have resulted in the woman having a tan. Most working class girls were brought up into poor families and had to start work at a young age. They earned little money and tended to marry men from there own deprived class. However, middle class women had diverse experiences and attitudes towards themselves. They were known as ‘helpmeets' by men and had accepted their position in the sexual hierarchy. All middle class families had employed servants, which meant women had little to do except for embroidery and entertaining as only a majority of them could educate themselves. Middle class girls were taught at home by mothers and governesses and learned how to ‘catch a man' and how to be a good wife. On the contrary, rich class women had the ‘easiest' life out of all the types of women. They had servants to look after the homes, thus they had more time to spend on their families and themselves. They could go to school for an education and could even choose to be a doctor, accountant or banker. Although rich women could take up a career in one these jobs, they were still restricted in society of taking up a career in other jobs such as diplomats, barristers or judges. Overall, rich women had the most pleasant life out of all the types of women but even they had started to get fractious of the restrictions and the disparity that was towards them. Women were starting to get irritated of not having the same rights and equality as men did during the 19th century. They were mainly annoyed because of the ‘separate spheres' theory. This theory explained the roles of men and women, which were listed inside two circles, one for each sex, had showed the roles that each person would have to do. Women's roles were harder and longer than the men's were and this was due to the inequality, at the time of the 19th century, which lead to a difference in roles. By 1870, women were becoming more frustrated of the restricted paths they could choose from and this had lead in women starting to campaign and protest for equal rights. Changes in the education opportunities encouraged women to campaign for the vote because women had began to comprehend that they were not getting the same education as men were. This had started to infuriate women as they couldn't do much with their careers and this resulted in a lower income for women to support their families with. Working class women couldn't educate themselves due to their class, middle class women had accepted their position on the sexual hierarchy and where known as ‘helpmeets' towards men whereas rich class women were allowed to educate themselves but there were only a handful of good academic girl's schools at that time, of which the government didn't bother much about. Even though some women didn't want a change, things were starting to look good for the ones that did. In 1874, the first school of medicine was founded for the medical education for women. In 1878, London University was the first to award women degrees on the same terms as men. Although some opportunities were opening for women, the idea of disparity was still consistent. Changes in the legal status of women encouraged women to campaign for the vote because the general attitude towards them was beginning to change due to the legal status at that time such as the Custody of Infants Act, which was introduced in 1839 and meant that women were authorized to claim custody of young children following separation. In addition, the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1857 introduced the possibility of a civil divorce, one that could be granted without an act of Parliament. Also the Matrimonial Causes Act allowed legally separated women to retain their earnings, giving them some control over their own income for the first time. Now that women were a part of the new laws, they wanted to insure that they could get the vote, which was most important for them to achieve. Albeit there were beginning to be superior changes, women were still not treated equally and the law was preventing them from exercising politics. Changes in the workplace encouraged women to campaign for female suffrage because women (mainly working class) were starting to get stressed of having to do domestic work as well as working in factories, mills etc for little reward and being called ‘irresponsible' by people because they'd work and not look after there children all the time. Because of this, women had started to get annoyed and wanted better rights at work and home. Small groups had started to form due to the inequality of women's rights and campaigning was beginning to appear by the twentieth century. Although women had started to protest for disparity, they still weren't receiving the attitudes by men and the law as they had hoped to. Political groups such as the NUWSS encouraged women to gain the vote because they were opening a whole new gateway for women and their rights. The NUWSS (National Union of Women's Suffrage Societies) was beginning to make it clear to people that they wanted the vote. Milicent Fawcet was the leader of the NUWSS, also known as the Suffragists, and aimed to expand the rights of women and to improve society. The Suffragists were doing this by protesting, going to political meetings and by peaceful persuasion. By doing this they wanted people to realise they were solemn. They were achieving and had the success of many Liberal MPs and some Conservative leaders, however this wasn't enough to gain the vote and the slow moving process meant that suffrage groups such as the Suffragists weren't getting anywhere with the gaining of the vote and women were running out of patience. In conclusion, I think that a campaign for women's suffrage developed in the years after 1870 because situations changed for women, which took them one step closer to gaining the vote. The reasons I have listed in my essay show how women had started to take action after the year1870, such as protesting, peaceful persuasion etc. The main reasons that I think have encouraged women to campaign for equality are education, the workplace, the change in the legal status and most importantly female suffrage groups. All of these reasons have given women a better understanding on why they should gain the vote and to demonstrate why male and female ‘separate spheres' should interlink with each other to give the genders equal roles. I think that female suffrage groups acted like the spark that lit the fire for female equality as it gave women a voice to express their feeling on how they would have liked to be treated and the rights they would have liked to achieve from the government. Suffrage groups were a good way of campaigning towards the 20th century because people, such as the government, would have noticed suffrage groups and would have listened to their explanations rather than listening to only one person trying to explain a point. Although women had started to make points that they'd feel strongly about clear, this wasn't enough to gain the vote. Women had gained social and economical freedom, however they had still lacked in political freedom, which had started to exasperate the majority of them. Groups such as the Suffragists were making points clear to people, however there slow moving process was not going to plan as women still hadn't gained the vote towards the 20th century, and if their was no vote then their would be no change, so women had started to run out of ideas and most of them had started to run out of patience. Why did a campaign for women’s suffrage develop in the years after 1870? The women's suffrage campaign developed after the years of 1870, because life and existence was unjust. They way they were treated escorted to the development of the campaigns. To transform life, rules need to be changed, by chosen and appropriate law makers – the government, to fulfil the needs of the people. In 1865, the first British woman-suffrage association was founded by Mill. Campaigns expanded because the vote could change the life of women. Women were accused of being unable to vote, and the franchise was opposed, such as by antifeminist Queen Victoria. The Liberal Party was committed to increase franchise, but did not deliver their promise, so protest began, as women were infuriated. Additionally, women in other countries were given the vote. In 1893, New Zealand was the first country that franchised women's vote. This displayed the role of women and their independence, to the world. The campaigns in Britain arose because they wanted the same to be done, as it could be achieved. Next, the 1867 Reform Act was declared. It gave many working class men the vote, but did not mention the women's license to votes. This angered women very deeply, as they were promised again the vote in the new laws, but were betrayed. Again, this made the campaigns upgrade, as they worked even more to succeed. Inequalities with men in the workplace also lead to progression of the campaigns. There were more women working in factories, doing long hours in dull, un-skilled, monstrous work with little pay, particularly in textile factories, or as domestic workers plus servants than men. Men, conversely, did more skilled work in addition to receiving more responsibility and money. This displayed unfairness women wanted to change. Famous cases of women being prevented from taking ‘male' jobs depicted to women that they could be capable of doing anything but the country's antifeminists would stop them, unless they were stopped first by the law. Inequality with men before the law angered women. When women married, all her property became her husbands. Additionally, women could not sue. This was unjust. Successful but slow pace of reforms were prior to 1870. In 1882 and 1857, the Matrimonial and Cause Act were made, which took cruelty, adultery, and desertion in a marriage into account. But, this was unfair because men had to be committed to do two of these, while women had to act one of these, to face the law, divorce. In 1870, the Married Women's Property Act was released again, but more developed, to prevent loss of fortunes. However, even when the law was changed, inequality still existed. How women were treated unfairly in the eyes of the government was why the campaigns increased. Increased education of middle class women meant that women wanted jobs they were educated for, such as doctors, lawyers and teachers. Famous successful women as role models such as Annie Besant, Florence Nightingale and Mary Seacole displayed that the work of women could revolutionise the world. Increased involvement of women in local politics allowed them to vote in local elections, such as the 1869 and 1882 Municipal Councils Act and in Schools Boards after 1870, plus Boards of Health from 1875. This acted as a taster of what could be, and women liked the power and control of voting. In conclusion, their development of their campaigns can stand to be symbolised that they wanted change and development since antiquity, in addition to the right of women to share on equal terms with men the political privileges afforded by representative government, and to vote in elections, referendums and hold public office.