In modern day America, people have taken to various outlets as their source of both entertainment and pleasure, and that includes recreational drug use. One heavily favored happens to be that of Cannabis, commonly known as Marijuana. The increased use of this drug, and perceived danger by many medical and legal officials, has led to highly contentious marijuana laws throughout the country. In discussion of this issue, different camps focus primarily on the state of the marijuana users, not anybody else involved. However, they are ignoring the larger benefit that the marijuana industry can have on the general public. . Marijuana and more specifically medical marijuana should be legal in the United States because of its health benefits and potential economic impact.

In the United States, marijuana is primarily used recreationally, but  there are copious instances of people utilizing cannabis to aid medical difficulties. According to the Marijuana Policy Project, there are 1,246,170 medical marijuana users in the twenty five states where it is legal. It’s also estimated that there would be an approximate 2,604,079 medical cannabis users if it were legal in all fifty states. Users are those who suffer from various conditions such as: epilepsy, HIV/AIDS, cancer, tourette’s syndrome, schizophrenia, sickle cell anemia, and others. Both the National Institute of Health and Food and Drug Administration are currently researching and putting some support behind cannabis being use to as a medicine, primarily in the case of chronic pain. The support for medical marijuana is increasing, as its impact is being discovered. It has the ability to help a significant amount of people with various illnesses to cope with the side affects that their condition gives them. For example, Charlotte Figi is a 5 year old girl who since the young age of 7 months had been suffering from a rare form of epilepsy, Dravet Syndrome, that caused her to have long uncontrollable seizures. Dravet syndrome could not be controlled by medicine and as Charlotte grew older, her seizures and overall life become much worse. Out of options, her family heard of another boy with Dravet Syndrome who used used marijuana to treat his seizures and the symptoms. They tried this method of extracting the oil from marijuana, giving it to Charlotte and saw an immediate decrease in the amount and frequency of her seizures. Over the last three years Charlotte seizures has stopped with the help of medical marijuana. While there may be relief in other medicine, marijuana is easily accessible, can be taken in various forms, and poses an immediate solution. The government has the responsibility of serving and maintaining the wellbeing of the public, and marijuana showing itself as a viable aid, further proves why it should be legalized.

The industry and selling of marijuana is one that has been embraced by several cities across the United States due to the possible economic growth that could be stimulated. The U.S World and News Report states that the implementation of medical marijuana can save U.S taxpayers approximately 468.1 million dollars every year. According to the California State Board of Equalization, the state took in about $50 million in sales taxes from 1,623 medical marijuana dispensaries across California that registered with the state and filed taxes in 2014. Similarly, in Illinois, medical marijuana dispensaries have generated 23.5 million dollars. For the states where marijuana is legalized, the access money is used to supply different demands within the city. In various cities in Colorado, where both medical and recreational marijuana has became a lucrative business, they are using funds to better the community. For example, In Aurora 12.4 million is being spent to address homelessness, outreach programs for the needy, and to build a new recreation center. Similarly, in Adams County they have earmarked more than 500,000 dollars in scholarships for low-income students, while the rest of the income is used for things like repairing infrastructure, and education efforts. In a time where many cities are struggling to adequately fund themselves, a device such as medical marijuana could prove a great solution. As seen with numerous cities, recreational and medical marijuana are producing large incomes for cities, that can be spread across various counties to assist in different things to better the city. This goes beyond the sick patients to help everyone for the better.

Even though medical marijuana and marijuana as a whole have positive impacts, they are often overlooked by the possible negative aspects that can be had. While there are negative factors that could come along with the legalization of medical marijuana, they all will be outweighed by the benefits. The overall well being of people should always be the most important piece of any governmental decision, and marijuana a proven it has benefits to those suffering with various illnesses, diseases, and disorders. The various economic impacts that can provide relief to many cities, would also allow them to implement different projects to help everyone. Money that could go towards several projects aimed to better society. In conclusion, the legalization of medical cannabis will not hurt, but those who need it as well as the country.

The legalization of medical marijuana is one that is highly debated amongst health and governmental officials for various reasons. These can include the fact that marijuana is indeed a drug, it can have risks to those taking it for health reasons, and there are other already legal alternatives. However, marijuana despite being classified as a drug, does something other banned substances don’t do and that's actually help people and society. It has been proven to help those affected by different illnesses and disabilities cope with side effects. As well as increasing the economy of the individual cities, and the country as a whole, which would benefit people all over as this money would be used to help them. With the potential drawbacks, there’s significant benefits that outweigh any negatives.  In conclusion, medical cannabis should legalized in the United States because of the positive impact it will have on everyone.

Works Cited

"Medical Marijuana Patient Numbers." Medical Marijuana Project, 6 July 2016. Web. 13 Oct. 2016. <https://www.mpp.org/issues/medical-marijuana/state-by-state-medical-marijuana-laws/medical-marijuana-patient-numbers/>.

"PA.gov." Frequently Asked Questions. Pennsylvania Department of Health, n.d. Web. 13 Oct. 2016. <http://www.health.pa.gov/My%20Health/Diseases%20and%20Conditions/M-P/MedicalMarijuana/Pages/FAQ.aspx#general>

Leonard, Kimberely. "Study: Medical Marijuana Laws Cut Drug Spending." U.S News and World Report. U.S News and World Report, 27 July 2016. Web. 13 Oct. 2016. <http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-07-07/medical-marijuana-availability-saves-taxpayers-money>.

Cillescas@denverpost.com, By Carlos Illescas |. "Marijuana Sales Tax Revenue Huge Boon for Colorado Cities." The Denver Post. The Denver Post, 02 Oct. 2016. Web. 16 Oct. 2016. <http://www.denverpost.com/2016/05/26/marijuana-sales-tax-revenue-huge-boon-for-colorado-cities/>.

The average student has been taught to always “aim for the A” in school. This belief will essentially give the mentality that to be the best, one must get a top grade. As a result, students  look at those that get the A as if they are they are better than their peers. However this belief is completely false because, Ambition is the key factor in defining a person’s position on the social pyramid.

There are many examples of individuals whose ambition mattered more than their formal education. According to Forbes, Li Ka-Shing is the richest man in China with a net worth of $31.9 billion. Mr. Shing is also one of the most influential/powerful people on the Earth, but the most amazing fact is that Mr. Shing is a high school dropout. At the tender age of 12 Mr. Shing left school to work in a watch strap factory, by 14 he worked in a plastic trading company. At 22 Mr. Shing had opened his first factory. Mr. Shing has become one of the most powerful people on the earth yet he holds no degree or even a highschool diploma. If Li Ka-Shing was placed in front of a trigonometric equation he would most likely not understand it, yet in the business world he is a rich and successful man. Even though Li does not have the ability to solve a quadratic equation, the one thing that Li has is Ambition. Li’s ambition has pushed him to the very top and allowed him to obtain both a high net worth and self worth, even though he has never graduated high school.

With ambition you can go much farther than what your grades predict. “I studied everything but never topped...but today the toppers of the best universities are my employes.” This quote is from the richest and most successful man on earth Bill Gates. Bill Gates has a net worth of $81.7 billion, and is one of the founders of Microsoft the world’s largest  PC software company. When discussing people that are at the top of the social pyramid, Bill Gates is a name that will be said at least twice. However, when discussing the highest grade point averages his name will not alway come up. Mr. Gates has never released his actual grades, but he has been quoted on numerous occasions saying how his grades were never the best. Society teaches that getting the best grades results in one being at the top of the social pyramid. But Mr. Gates proves that teaching incorrect. He himself has admitted to not getting the best grades, yet the majority of people in America know who he is. Since Bill Gates never got the best grades, his standing on the social pyramid should not be at number 1. But somehow it is. The reason for this is simple; Mr. Gates did not let his imperfect grades limit him, instead he used his ambition to succeed to fuel his trip to the top of the social pyramid.

If we all stopped to think about it we would realize that success is not a matter of grades but ambition. Society has implanted the idea that grades represent a person’s self worth and value. But this is nowhere near the case. It is possible for a student to have a C average and still become a multimillionaire. It is possible for a child to have little to no education, and become one of the most powerful people on the face of this planet. The true factor that defines a person’s self worth and value is their ambition. Ambition is what pushes a person to become great. Ambition is the key factor in defining a person’s position on the social pyramid. Those that dream big will be able to reach the top when their grades are not that great. Likewise it is also possible for a person to not dream big and have a lower position on the social pyramid because of the little ambition they have.

Stories come in hundreds of shapes and sizes. They follow good guys and bad guys, likely heroes and unlikely heroes, humans and animals. The storylines range from the most generic to the most unique and complex. There’s been variations of every kind of story that the mind can think of, but arguably no basis for a story is as popular as the underdog story— that of the poor, unlikely hero who has to combat the evils that are much larger than themselves. In modern movies, this includes the Rocky movies to the Star Wars movies and hundreds in between. Why do people love underdog stories so much? The 1998 Pixar film A Bug’s Life proves humans innately love rooting for underdogs because subconsciously they believe that doing so makes them more unique and interesting than others.

In order to understand how A Bug’s Life proves this idea, one must first understand why people take such interest in underdog stories. In University of California Professor Abby Prestin’s research paper titled The Pursuit of Hopefulness: Operationalizing Hope in Entertainment Media Narratives, she found, “…those in the underdog condition felt more hopeful and reported greater motivation to pursue their own goals…” The  people watching the underdog stories felt more optimistic and capable of following their own motivations. It made them feel sanguine, but more importantly, individually capable and assured. Watching and rooting for someone that realistically shouldn’t win, but does win, makes them feel more unique and positive, partially due to the inspirational factor, but also as a boost for their own perseverance. They were able to stick with these underdogs in spite of the invariable realistic chances of them actually winning. It’s the rewarding feeling that the viewer gets that makes them motivated and like their own person, not the result itself.

This begs the question: How does the movie A Bug’s Life represent this idea? It all hinges on the main character, Flick. Similarly to the rest of the ants in the story, he is an underdog. He and the ants are much weaker than the grasshoppers, and seem incapable of defeating them. However, what makes Flick different is how he’s perceived by the other ants. He’s seen as an ant that’s even more incapable than the rest, as an inventor who only makes situations worse, and an idiot. When he sets out to find aid, it’s in order to get rid of him, not because they believe in him. He’s an individual within an ant colony, insects that supposedly lack individuality. He is, in essence, an underdog, within the underdogs, and when the ants, against all odds, defeated the grasshoppers, their victory can be attributed to him. He remained willing to fight and believe in the underdogs the whole way, unlike the ants who refuse to believe that they can defeat the grasshoppers. As such, he was the unique, while the rest of the ants were ordinary and members of the hive mind. Just as how to the viewer, they are unique, as they remain rooting for the underdogs, and are rewarded by a sense of individuality when they win.

To be entirely certain of this idea that people want to see an underdog tale, one needs to look no further than professional sports. Underdogs have existed in every competitive sports scene, one example as recent as March Madness of 2014. According to Forbes, the Brigham Young University did a research study on how underdog competition affects the viewership of basketball during March Madness. What they found is that a finals game that featured a expectation defying team, or “Cinderella Team,” would get around 35% more viewers than if the match was between to notoriously equal teams. This proves that more viewers would watch the finals if the match was statistically meant to be a stomp, regardless of if their team was in it or not. Viewers are more excited to watch if there is a chance that an underdog team could take the win. This also lines up with the idea that viewers want to root for an underdog team, for the same reasons as before. If the team that shouldn’t win does win, and the view was rooting for this team, then the viewer will get the same sense of morality and individuality as is seen with the example of movies.

It may seem odd to most people at first, to consider that A Bug’s Life is making a statement about the psychology of human beings, but when one stops to consider the facts, it becomes surprisingly evident. A Bug’s Life is a movie all about setting oneself apart from others, to be an individual and not just a part of the hive mind. So it would not be surprising if the creators intentionally made a main character that would insight these feelings in the viewer. When underdog stories are made and read, watched, listened to, and so on, the character isn’t the only one who feels like an underdog, the viewer is as well. A Bug’s Life embodies this idea, and as such makes it the perfect movie for explaining these underdog effects.

Works Cited

Becher, Jonathan. "Do Underdogs Boost March Madness Ratings?" Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 31 Mar. 2014. Web. 12 Oct. 2016.

Prestin, Abby. "The Pursuit of Hopefulness: Operationalizing Hope in Entertainment Media Narratives." Media Psychology 16 March, 2013: 318-46.

A Bug's Life. Dir. John Lasseter and Andrew Stanton. By Andrew Stanton, Donald McEnery, and Bob Shaw. Pixar, 1998.

Dress codes are present in most schools across the country; whether it be a distinct uniform, or a set of regulations that determine what is acceptable by the school’s standards. The guidelines claim to define appropriate attire that will not take away from the purpose of school, which is to get an education and prepare students for the future. However, schools today seem to view the purpose of dress codes in a different light, creating a double standard of what apparel is and is not acceptable in school based on gender, and often targeting females. The sexist dress codes enforced in many high schools pose many negative effects for the young girls being scrutinized for their outfit choices.

In most cases, school dress codes end up being used to police female students’ bodies to make sure that they do not distract or ‘tempt’ their male peers. Schools even go as far as to slut-shame girls for the clothes they are wearing. The unfortunate part is that it is not only male teachers who administer these practices. The female headteacher of Trentham high school, Dr. Rowena Blencowe, banned skirts claiming that girls wearing skirts “isn’t fair for male members of students or staff… it is a distraction.”1 In 2014, the male principal of Devil’s Lake High School, located in North Dakota, punished a girl for wearing leggings. Following this, he called an assembly where two clips were shown from the movie Pretty Women, where the main character is a prostitute. He claimed that the clips were shown to show the students that “You are in charge of the image you project to others and how you want to be perceived.”2 Comparing adolescent girls who choose to dress comfortably to school to a prostitute implies that females bodies are sexual objects, and that young men are not expected to have self control when they come in contact with a female wearing a skirt that shows her knees.

By contrast to this policing of girls’ clothing, instances where a male student is told to change because their outfit is inappropriate or against school guidelines is very rare. In one entry of the Everyday Sexism Project, a forum where people can share their experiences with gender inequality, a young girl wrote of a time where she got penalized for wearing shorts. She left the principal's office and passed a male peer wearing a shirt with two stick figures, one was a male holding down the female's head in his crotch and saying ‘good girls swallow.’ The girl said that her teachers walked right by this young man without a word.3  This experience is just one of many where a female gets dress coded for a seemingly minor and unimportant reason, while her male peers walk around displaying offensive messages on their shirts and their pants sagging low, often times exposing their underwear. These types of situations occur because schools are more focused on there being ‘too much’ skin showing than what would actually be considered offensive to the community. Ignoring the attire of males, while scrutinizing females for their outfits inadvertently teaches girls that they are unequal to men. Gender inequality will never end if females are taught from a young age they they are unequal to their male counterparts.

Somewhere leading up this point, the concept of high school dress codes have gotten mixed up. When asked, people may say that dress codes are crucial, as they prepare students for their future, but on closer inspection, high school dress codes are a collection of sexist double standards that pose many negative effects for the young girls being scrutinized for their outfit choices. For the good of the future generations as a whole, dress codes must be updated. If they are not, females will continue growing up believing that they will always be a man’s target, simply due to the clothing they pick out in the morning. Rather than making girls feel uncomfortable for what they are wearing or shaming their bodies, schools should simply educate their students of what clothing will be acceptable when they begin to move into the workforce - both males and females alike.

Works Cited

1 Bates, Laura. "School Dress Codes Reinforce the Message That Women's Bodies Are Dangerous." The Guardian. 10 Sept. 2015. Web.

2 Klein, Rebecca. "High School Uses Clips From 'Pretty Woman' To Show Students How Not To Dress." The Huffington Post. October 2nd, 2014. Web.

3 "How School Dress Codes Shame Girls and Perpetuate Rape Culture." Time. 22 May 2015. Web.

In the recent years, it has become the new norm for children to be exposed to technology at a young age. iPads, TV’s and game devices are seen as an accessory or a toy for kids in this day age. However, an increasing number of pediatricians and parents are concerned about this trend, and they are right to be worried. Not only is it taking away their precious childhood, where they should be using their imagination and doing recreational activities, but it is affecting them as a whole.  Technology interferes with their physical, social and psychological development because it limits their opportunity to develop skills involving that will be critical in their life.

An article published by the Huffington Post called, “The Impact of Technology on Developing Children”, explains that a child needs four critical factors to develop properly being movement, touch, human connection, exposure to nature. Further analysis shows that the tactile and attachment systems are under stimulated, while the visual and auditory and in overload. With that said, with technology advancing rapidly, children spend up to 7.5 hours a day using overusing their certain systems,  and it defeats the purpose of children going outside to play and get their daily amount of exercise which results in various health issues such as obesity. Time outside offers to keep them healthy while their brains and learn necessary skills to help them later in life,  but many spend the majority of their days staring at a screen.

Social media is changing the way the future generation thinks, understands, and interacts with one another. In a report published by the University of Rhode island called “Determining the Effects of Technology on Children”, it explains the many negatives that come along with young children using technology. In the report it was found that when using technology, such as phones, computers etc.,  at a developing age, people then have a lessened ability to multitask and changes social norms. Children exposed to cellphones and computers that access social media offers them to hide behind a “digitally wall”, and is used as a coping method, when they should be learning how to socialize. In the article it states, “As children have more of their communication through electronic media, and less face to face they begin to feel more lonely or depressed.” With that said, shy children will often be able to communicate over the internet versus learning how to overcome those issues face to face. Social media is becoming a substitution for personal interaction, affecting how young children learn how to socialize because of their easy access to technology.

Video games and Apps also affects the health of children, as it refrains them from movement and touch. More than half of children in America have a TV in their room with a video, and a high percentage has access to iPads, computers and video games. According to British Columbia's Society of Occupational Therapists, in their 2009 newsletter it says, “Children now rely on technology for the majority of their play, grossly limiting necessary challenges to their bodies in order to achieve optimal sensory and motor development…”. With these devices scattered around their homes, it creates a world of 2D where there aren’t stimulating touch and movement into their playtime.

As technology advances, the risks only grow. Children need to be aware of these issues, alongside their parents to keep them on the right track to being healthy and developing properly. Technology should be used in small doses, to give children time to spend outside, socialize, and stimulated movement and touch in their everyday lives. If technology exposure is left unchecked, then these children risk growing up to be stuck in a world not knowing fundamental skills.

Works Cited

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cris-rowan/technology-children-negative-impact_b_3343245.html

Rowan, Cris. "The Impact of Technology on the Developing Child." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 29 May 2013. Web. 17 Oct. 2016.

http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1212&context=srhonorsprog

Hetch, Kristina. "Determining the Effects of Technology on Children." Digital Commons. University of Rhode Island, 2011. Web.

http://www.sensomotorische-integratie.nl/CrisRowan.pdf

Rowan, Chris. "The Impact of Technology on Child Sensory and Motor Development." The Impact of Technology on Child Sensory and Motor Development by Cris Rowan, OTR (n.d.): n. pag. Sensomotorische. OTR. Web.

http://www.futureofchildren.org/publications/journals/article/index.xml?journalid=45&articleid=200&sectionid=1303

Shields, Margie K., and Richard E. Behrnam. "The Future of Children, Princeton - Brookings: Providing Research and Analysis to Promote Effective Policies and Programs for Children."  - The Future of Children -. Princeton Brookings, n.d. Web. 17 Oct. 2016.

“What’s in a Name?”

Everyday a plethora of sounds pass people by: the beep of car horns, the explosion of a sneeze, and of course, the language spoken between humans . The sounds of words play a huge part in the daily lives of humans, yet many don’t think much of it. In conversation, there is a whole lot that goes into the words people choose to use, even if this process is subconscious. This is because different words convey different meanings, even if they are synonyms. This is in part because of their sound, it’s the difference between using a slit and a slot--different sounds are associated with different meanings. Although languages can be quite different, the same sounds are internationally recognized as symbolic for similar meanings. As a result,  changing the sound of these words would alter the symbols that people associate with the words.

A popular line from Shakespeare’s famous, Romeo and Juliet states, “What's in a name? that which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet; so Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd, retain that dear perfection which he owes without that title.” This line sounds sweet, but what Juliet claims may not be entirely true. Certainly the name of a rose is not what gives it its shape, or color, or sweet aroma but the sound of a word does do something to alter the perception of an object, if only in small amounts. Nico Lang, a former blogger for radio station WBEZ, makes a point of saying that, “The linguistic formula for a disgusting word is to make sure it contains phonetically abrasive letters like ‘b,’ ‘g,’ ‘m,’ ‘u’ and ‘o,’ which you’ll find to be common among the most hated.” This part of his argument goes to prove my point, though he then goes on to say that, “It’s not just the word, but what it represents to us. When we hear ‘vomit,’ we think not just of its unflattering construction but the very image it signifies.” and that, “our revulsions come socio-culturally loaded.” The second part of his argument is not incorrect. Yes, it’s true, the most hated words in the English language display similar characteristics, in that most of them are associated with unpleasant things, but that is not enough. Not all words associated with terrible meanings are so hated, half of reason for the hatred that boils to the surface of people’s feelings after hearing certain words is the sound of the words themselves. Many of the words that are held in such contempt are abrasive sounding and tend to linger in one’s mouth after saying them. After looking at several different lists of the most hated words in the English language, one will find that this statement is true for the majority of unfavorable words. If a rose, instead was named something like a “worpuss” or “gratak” it would seem much less appealing, at least at first, one would, on instinct be semi-repulsed by it, even without any knowledge of the definition. This is because of the sounds are harsh and associated with unkind things in the world, for example the long “s” sound in “worpuss” reminds us of words like “fester,” and “moist.” The sound that both “g” and “k” make are aggressive and in the word “gratak” the combination of the two provides no relief from the onslaught of harsh sounds.

Some words are so beautiful they could be played on repeat forever and no one would ever tire of them. Others are cringe worthy and will grate against ears whenever spoken. What determines whether they are in the category of music to the ears or nails against chalkboard widely has to do with sounds that are easier and more delicate on the ears being associated with beauty and goodness. David Crystal’s article, The Ugliest Words that appeared in The Guardian, a British national daily newspaper, states that, “Words with soft sounds such as 'l,' 'm,' and 'n,' and long vowels or diphthongs, reinforced by a gentle polysyllabic rhythm, are interpreted as 'nicer' than words with hard sounds such as 'g' and 'k,' short vowels and an abrupt rhythm." Though this may not be true for all people, because it is true that in some cases beauty is subjective, the majority will agree that when words sound softer they are more attractive or nicer.

It’s not a stretch to say that if people associate sounds with nice vs. mean, they associate them with many other things as well. Such is the argument of Dr. Richard Nordquist, an English and rhetoric emeritus professor of Armstrong Atlantic State University. He wrote an article stating that, “Sound symbolism is often a result of secondary association.” For example, words that begin with gl- convey an idea of a sheen, smoothness, or brightness, words like glory, glee, glimmer, glib, even glance and glimpse because sight is so closely tied to light. This is not the only case where this happens. Then there is the point where some words just sound smaller than others, like dints and dents, which were originally just different pronunciations of the same words, but when said aloud, instinctively one would think that a dint is smaller than a dent, it just sounds smaller. This is not only true for English, A study done by Berkeley professor John J. Ohala  shows that many other languages share these same sound associations, sounds with “High front vowels like [i I y e], [-grave] consonants, voiceless consonants, high tone etc.,” are often associated with “small” and “low back vowels like [A √ ç o], [+grave] consonants, voiced consonants, and low tone.” are often associated with “large.” This goes to say that, sound can have a lot more power in affecting perception than people may give it credit for and changing even the pronunciation of a word such as dent, can alter how it is seen, even if that alteration is only a dint.

When asked, people might say that the small attributes of language do not concern them. But on closer inspection, understanding what they are can lead to an easier pathway to worldwide communication. Though people do not yet all speak an international language, realizing that across all languages there are similarities that one can spot through the sound of those languages it can make communication across cultures much easier. When people are able to communicate ideas with each other, amazing things can happen, larger advancements in science, mathematics, art, and basic empathy and understanding are within grasp.

Works Cited

Kate Burridge, Gift of the Gob: Morsels of English Language History. HarperCollins Australia, 2011

David Crystal, "The Ugliest Words." The Guardian, July 18, 2009

Nordquist Grammar & Composition Expert, Richard. "What Is Sound Symbolism in English?"

About.com Education. N.p., 2016. Web. 25 Sept. 2016.

Lang, Nico. "“Moist” And 28 Other Gross-Sounding English Words That Everyone Hates." Thought

Catalog. N.p., 2013. Web. 25 Sept. 2016.

Shakespeare, William. "SCENE II. Capulet's Orchard." SCENE II. Capulet's Orchard. N.p., n.d.

Web. 25 Sept. 2016.

Ohala, John J. "Sound Symbolism." Linguistics. UC Regents, n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2016.

At some point in everybody’s life, they will die. It happens for a variety of reasons, and most of the time it’s involuntary. It’s safe to say that a large majority of people do not want to die, or at least fear the moment of their own death, and so they fear the fact that they can and will eventually die. And although death is often pointed to as an unknown, it is not an abstract thing in the human mind. That fear of death stems from the active comparison to life and the individual’s quantification of life.

One of the things most people know about death is that, past a certain point, the older a person gets, the more prone they are to a “natural death”, as one’s organs have been keeping them alive for a long time and just get tired and fail, so they can no longer stay alive. What is surprising is that the older people get, the less and less they fear death. In a study done by Dr. Karl A. Pillemer on elderly people, “the vast majority of [the] respondents described themselves as not thinking about death much, and much less so than when they were younger. It’s true...that research shows lower death anxiety with advancing age.” Note that these people didn’t want to die; they simply didn’t fear it. The correlation is certainly there. This shows that people who think about death less fear death less. This isn’t simply a case of older one gets, the less one fears death. It’s also not a case of being scared of dying just being hardwired into the human mind. It’s a subconscious feeling of how much their life is worth. A person who has lived for 90 years would most likely feel that their experiences, if quantified, would be worth more than the experiences of one who has lived for 18 years. These elderly people aren’t afraid of death, because at this point in their life, they feel like what they’ve done is worth something.

What’s truly compelling is that, in this case, people with mental illnesses actually have similar mindsets when it comes to death as elderly people do. Mental illness is a big cause of a person wanting their life to end. According to the University of Santa Cruz, when talking about young people, “A major cause of suicide is mental illness, very commonly depression. People feeling suicidal are overwhelmed by painful emotions and see death as the only way out.” As opposed to people who simply don’t fear death, those who are feeling suicidal actually do want to die. This relates to this idea of comparing the knowledge of life to death. These suicidal people see that dying is a good alternative to living, as they think death is better than life. They think about it, and they say that dying, even if they don’t know what that entails, is a “way out” from the thing they know about. If one considers life like an object, they simply don’t want to own this thing that they know they don’t want, so they’re not scared to lose it.

So, what happens if a person does value their life, but still chooses the opposite? There’s another group of people who actually choose to die: Kamikaze. These are Japanese pilots who suicide into Allied ships with their own in order to kill large numbers of enemies will little to no possible opposition. However, according to English Online, “not all pilots volunteered out of love for their homeland…Pilots who didn't volunteer were seen as cowards.” This is a similar idea to how people with mental illnesses actually want to die. The Kamikaze usually didn’t actually want to end their life, but if one considers life like an object, the pilots didn’t want to have this life in which they are considered a coward. The value they placed on their life was low. The alternative, which is suiciding into an Allied ship and dying, seemed better than that life. They saw dying as a good alternative to life since they actually feared what they knew in this life.

Ultimately, every person is going to die at some point, and although many people might not think that being scared of death matters to them, its influence goes beyond being comfortable with dying to actually just being comfortable with living. This idea of quantifying life and giving it a value, while interesting at first, can very clearly have drastic consequences. If one constantly just thinks about whether or not their life is worth something, there is a chance they would come up with the answer, “No,” which begs the question, “Then why continue?”  Death is not something that should be thought about all the time, as a life lived in fear is not one lived in peace. The solution is simple: just stop thinking about it.