It is unlikely that social consequences of false memories can be avoided. Elizabeth Loftus was intrigued to study false memories, and is perhaps personally responsible for subsequent developments throughout the history of false memories. Some of this history addresses various theories aimed at isolating how or why false memories occur. These include Source Monitoring Framework, Activation Monitoring Theory, Fuzzy Trace Theory, and strategies for persuasion which can lead to the development of false memory. Such persuasion leads to the present discussion concerning how persuasion in the judicial system has created false confessions and wrongful eyewitness testimonies, due to the Misinformation Effect.
Another occurrence of irony emphasizing the flaw within the court’s process of prosecution is when he states Mary Warren’s punishment and the girl’s punishment. He states that if Mary Warren “has been conquered by Satan...her neck will break for it but if she speaks true, I bid you now drop your guile and confess your pretense, for a quick confession will go easier on you”( Miller 95). A situational irony is an event that surprises the audience. This would be considered ironic since both crimes of Mary Warren and the girls are on the same level of severity and seriousness.However, Mary Warren is the only one being killed for her confession of her crimes, while the others live. This simple example shows Miller’s belief on the corruption within the court system as Danforth is allowing his favoritism control over his actions throughout Mary Warren’s trial.
Also, by being deceptive at the end of the story, this shows that her character at the beginning is an act due to the fact that she had a plan all along. Finally, this also shows that she is not being honest since she is lying to the officers. Once again, as a result of this, she is allowed to get away with murder. In conclusion, this character: Mary Maloney is just an everyday typical housewife until there is a plot twist to the story, which completely changes her character. At the end of the story, Mary is able to get away with murder.
3 adaptive function of this mechanism is questionable from a social point of view, it is effective in preserving the integrity of an individual and his self-esteem. These observations make it possible to understand fitness of false memories of sexual abuse created in therapy in the 1990s. A study conducted by Rubis and Bernsten (2007; as cited in Brédart, 2012) has shown that people who are receiving individual therapy are most likely to believe that they were sexually abused in childhood. According to the authors, those people has constructed false memories because they provide a reason, a justification for their current psychological distress. Research has shown that false memories, changing or upsetting personal history, may preserve a person by making his behaviour consistent with his identity.
I saw Bridget Bishop with the Devil!” The strict rules of Puritan society does not allow individuality to thrive. Abigail decides to “confess” because she does not want to suffer the consequences of society. Abigail is seemingly innocent. However, she is one of the masterminds behind the hysteria of the Witch Trials. Innocence is featured as a concern in the Salem trials because Abigail Williams was seen as an innocent victim of witchcraft.
One such word shaker was a small, skinny girl. She was renowned as the best word shaker of her region because she knew how powerless a person could be without words” (446). Death was talking about Liesel because she saw past the propaganda and speeches Hitler put out and she understood Hitler was wrong. Propaganda is a way of using words or images to try and influence views. Since Hitler used propaganda to influence many people, this further supports the books theme of words being more powerful than anything.
After the success of Sarah J. Maas’s series Throne of Glass, female assassins have become more prominent in young-adult fiction and an obvious trope. Not only this, but she has a Grace, like a superpower or extreme skill, that we originally believe is the extreme skill to kill well. However, the author deems it “too violent” or “too evil,” and we learn that no, she is not a savage (because that would be repulsive and unappealing) but can survive through anything. I absolutely abhorred this change; with killing as a skill, perhaps the author could have built more on Katsa being a morally-grey protagonist, something young-adult fiction lacks, but she instead goes on to introduce all sorts of other ways Katsa is oh-so-good and working to help others. She runs The Council, a group of people who oppose corrupt and power-hungry male leaders, another trope.
These people would also say it is difficult to replace animals because other options are more difficult to test on. According to Ferdowsian, replacing animals in research would be difficult because the biology and genetic make up of animals is too similar to humans to be easy to replicate. Therefore, removing all animal testing would be a difficult task because testing the products on an actual organism allow researchers to mirror the outcomes of the products on humans. However, Ferdowsian continues by stating, “While it is important to acknowledge limitations to non-animal methods remain, recent developments demonstrate that these limitations should be viewed as rousing challenges rather than insurmountable obstacles.” (par. 21) She is essentially saying that while it will be difficult to remove animal testing, science should not give up on this goal just because it will prove
Several scientists only think how to making their test successfully without knowing that animal they use are being abused and maltreated. Not all tests are relevant to human health. Certain scientific tests can cause human diseases instead of having a good effect. Testing on animals for medical research is not helpful because it can give us wrong answers. Many tests done on animals can provide misleading results.
The validity and even humanity in animal testing is something on the margins of morale, it is not something done out of joy, it is not pleasurable for the testers or the tested themselves. So there, we are given a reason to submit the simple question of whether animal testing should be permitted at all. Why not simply cut our losses and move on to greener pastures, after all it is indeed the definition of grotesque to experiment on living beings and people may have been right to protest and raise awareness for such cruel misconducts. There must be something that can be done. However, that line of thinking quickly clashes with the fact that with the help of exactly such testing, with the sacrifice of those animal lives, human lives are saved in return.