The Evils of Drug Addiction

The Evils of Drug Addiction Free Online Research Papers Drug addition is one of biggest problems in our society today. It is not only a personal problem that dramatically affects individuals’ lives, but it is a major problem that affects society as whole. Therefore, it is necessary for us to think of the reasons people take to drug addiction, how it affects us, and the method to solve it. Why does man take to drugs? Some think it adds to pleasure; some others think that it take away physical weariness. Still others take it to forget their worries, while others take it to please the company they keep. In cold country, they take it to keep themselves warm. While in very small doses drug act as medicines, they can only bring harm in large doses. They have a doping effect and hence, at the spur of the moment, the person may act vigorously but only find him weaker later. Sustained consumption of them in large quantities will lead us to dependency and addiction. Drug addiction is really harmful for our society. Once one becomes addicted, he cannot control himself. He can do anything to have drugs when his addiction comes. When he doesn’t have enough money to buy drugs, he might rob or even murder to have money. Thus, it is easy to understand that drug addiction leads to crime. Drug addition also damages the economy of our society because drugs are very expensive. The rich will become poor, and the poor will become homeless if they are addicted. Using drugs makes people lose their morality. They are no longer who they were before. All they want and think about is how to satisfy their addiction. They don’t care about their families. They give up their responsibilities. They don’t care about anything in the world, and all they care about is drugs. If all of people become addicted, what will our society be? Drug addiction is also harmful for their health. They may have diseases or die when overusing drugs. People bring troubles to themselves when they use drugs. In order to forget worries, they take drugs, but that is not the answer to one’s worry. Drug addition brings moral degradation. The addict himself knows it, so he consumes them only in secret and no addict openly say he is an addict. Socially, an addict is looked down upon and people would try to avoid a drug addict. He would be a nuisance wherever he is at home or in company. He would bring untold misery to his people and those around him. Except in the company of addicts, he would be looked upon as a leper. His family will also share the ignominy because people will point the accusing finger at such a family. Financially it ruins the addict. He will be bankrupt no matter how rich he is because of spending money to buy drugs. Considered wisely, people should avoid drugs and never try to take drugs even once because it is very difficult to quit using them. It is really unfortunate if they don’t realize the harmful effect. Certainly, the drugs will not and cannot add or bring pleasure. If anyone thinks in that way, it is an illusion. For God’s sake, one should never tempted by them. Research Papers on The Evils of Drug AddictionThe Effects of Illegal ImmigrationThe Relationship Between Delinquency and Drug UseCapital Punishment19 Century Society: A Deeply Divided EraMind TravelGenetic EngineeringEffects of Television Violence on ChildrenArguments for Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS)Relationship between Media Coverage and Social andInfluences of Socio-Economic Status of Married Males

Character Is Fate

Character is Fate – Essay â€Å"A man’s character is his fate† once said the Greek philosopher Heraclites. By this he meant that our personalities and actions shape the outcomes of our lives and therefore our destiny. This statement opposes the traditional view that man’s fate is determined by an external force (name it god or even chance). This argument is basically one of faith: do you believe we shape our own futures by how we act, or are our lives programmed in a certain unchangeable way? In other words, do you believe in an omnipotent being that has our lives or at least our futures predetermined? As we shall see, a man’s character defines his life (as his behaviour, emotions and actions determine his daily life), but I believe that our fate is predetermined and unchangeable and that there is divine intervention, therefore a matter that we have no control over. To support the fact that we might be able to define our daily life but not our fates or futures there is the unanswered question of ‘why do bad things happen to good people? Furthermore, character is not the only aspect in deciding a man’s fate: external events (chance and Nature) will also alter the processes and outcomes of our lives. Heraclites and Novalis (German philosopher)[1] had an interesting argument, but unfortunately one that only applies in a utopian world. Many people believe that a person’s personality determines their place in life, therefore supporting Heraclites’ idea. Basically, this suggests that depending on how a person lives, what he does and how he deals with events the outcome of his life will be shaped accordingly. For example, in Thomas Hardy’s ‘The Mayor of Casterbridge’, we understand that Mr. Henchard’s personality flaws (his temper and his naivety especially) lead him slowly to worse situations, which finally end up in him not wanting to be remembered once he is dead. On the other hand, Farfrae, a character which is much more appealing, sensitive, humane and kind is victim of fortunate events such as the prosperity of his business and his marriage to Lucetta. Both these cases can be attributed to the fact that life is working against Henchard while it works very well for Farfrae due to their aforementioned personalities. Unquestionably, the way in which we act will attract positive or negative outcomes respectively. In this matter, we could say that we are the architects of our fates[2] and that even though it might be very difficult to do so, we can manage to change our personality and therefore change our fates in a desired direction. Fate is in our hands (or should we better say in our character), as Scottish author Samuel Smiles words tell us: â€Å"Sow a thought, and you reap an act; Sow an act, and you reap a habit; Sow a habit, and you reap a character; Sow a character, and you reap a destiny. †[3] On the other hand, if we follow the argument discussed in the previous paragraph, then we could draw the conclusion that good things should always happen to good people and bad things to bad people. In real life, this is almost never true, and in many examples we can find quite the opposite: bad things happening to good people and vice versa. How many good and innocent people have been victims of the greed of evil people such as the Holocaust, the Iraq War or the bombings in Nagasaki and Hiroshima? If we want to narrow this to a theological explanation, then we can argue that God made us all in his image, therefore making us independent of moral choice and giving us total freedom (this suggests that we can control our characters in the way we decide because we have been given the freedom to do so. I don’t support this idea, but it is however the most rational to explain why bad things happen to good people: as there are also bad people in the world that act freely, then you can be a victim of their acts no matter who you are or how you are). However, as he has given everyone freedom, then we can all be victims of good and bad from other people. [4] Your character might determine your fate, but it is not the sole factor because as we can see, bad things can happen to good people and vice versa. I believe that this is a matter of chance (the fact that a good person might get in the way of a bad one and therefore have a terrible outcome which his/her character doesn’t reflect) and even tough we might have a certain personality that should lead us to a consequent destiny, unexpected and random variables get in the way and might change the course of our fates. Definitely our character will have an important role to play in determining the outcomes of our lives, but from this idea we can draw the idea that although character controls our life, we can’t control our fates: our fates are predestined. We can call these omnipotent force God, devil, providence or chance, but the fact is that our fate has already been planned for us and even if we could change our character (making us believe that we are changing our fate), we are only changing direction into a fate we think is new, but in reality is the fate that was always predestined for us. Furthermore, character is not the only factor in determining our lives. We must consider external factors such as the environment, nature and fortune. For example, in the novel ‘The Mayor of Casterbridge’ by Thomas Hardy, the main character, Mr. Henchard organizes a fair for the townspeople in order to show the people that despite what he appears to be, he is really kind and humane. Everything turns out wrong for him because heavy rain ruins the event (Nature intervenes) and later on in the book when he finally tries to redeem himself by taking good care of her daughter, he finds out that she is really not her daughter and that her real daughter died many years ago (fortune intervenes). We can’t attribute this ‘bad luck’ to Henchard’s character; this is simply a series of external factors that play against him in a random and unfortunate way. Yet another example is a Jewish story about a man, Moishe Lipsky, who moved into New York in the time of the Great Depression and when he applied for the only job he could find (a janitor), he was turned down because he was illiterate. So, he opened a little storefront and gradually became a rich and successful man. One day, when he goes to the bank to ask for a loan and he signs the papers with an X (as he was illiterate) and the loan officer tells him ‘Just think, in just a few years you have become a very rich man. It makes me wonder what you would have become if you could read and write’ and Lipsky answers ‘A janitor’. 5] It is ironical how things turn out in this story, but chance certainly plays a role in the success of this good and honest man. He arrives to America just in a difficult time and his predestined conditions make him illiterate. Without these factors of Nature, chance or omnipotence, the man could have actually turned out to be a janitor and not the successful businessman he turned out to be. Anyone who has a belief in an omnipotent body must understand that our nature is predestined and that our futures are set, so no matter what we do, we will always make our choices to lead the way to our predetermined fate. In an idealistic world, our character is certainly our fate, if no external factors (chance or nature) intervene. However, even though in practice we can definitely say that our personalities shape our destiny, I believe that God has a definite purpose for each one of us and therefore He has determined our destiny from the very first moment we were conceived. Furthermore, the fact that good things happen to bad people and vice versa reflects the fact that our fates must be predetermined, and therefore while our personalities might lead us in a certain way, our fate (whether good or bad) is already written. We can change our characters at free will and this will make us lead an ensuing life, but our destiny is set and no matter what we do, we will never be able to determine it. [1] â€Å"Character and fate are two words for the same thing† – Novalis [2] â€Å"Each man is the architect of his own fate. † – Appius Claudius [3] http://www. americanchronicle. com/articles/view/20750 [4] http://judaism. about. com/library/3_askrabbi_o/bl_simmons_murder. htm [5] http://www. petermalakoff. com/character_and_fate. html

Organism Physiology Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Organism Physiology - Essay Example Frog and Its Environment Researchers have done a lot of research on the physiology of frog. Some of the main organs of a frog studied extensively by the researchers include head, trunk, belly, webbed foot, hind leg, front leg, tongue, eye, nostril, and tympanum. Let us get an overview of some of the main organs of a frog in order to get an understanding of the roles that these organs play in making a frog adapted to its environment. Retrieved from http://www.infovisual.info/02/026_en.html Physiology of Frog Retrieved from http://www.biology-online.org/biology-forum/about14315.html Head Head is the uppermost part of a frog. The organs present in this portion include nostrils, mouth, eye, and tympanum. The internal structure of this portion includes vomerine teeth, maxillary teeth, internal nostrils, Eustachian tube, glottis, esophagus, and tongue. Trunk The trunk is the central part of a frog. Some organs attached with this part include head and limbs. Rear leg Rear legs of a frog hel p it take short and long jumps. Each of the rear legs has five toes. Rear legs are made in such a way that they act like springs for a frog and help it jump. Frogs have webbed feet, which help them swim in water (Drummond & Tom, 2011). Front leg Front legs of a frog are shorter in length. They help a frog leap forward and save the body from touching earth after jumping. Tongue â€Å"A frog's tongue is fastened in the front, not the back and is folded backward to the throat† (Thomas, 2007). The length of the tongue is nearly one-third of the frog’s overall length. There is a sticky material present on the tongue of a frog which attached the food to the tongue which is eventually swallowed by the frog. â€Å"It takes less than a second for a frog's tongue to roll out, adhere to prey, and roll back into the frog's mouth† (Anonymous, 1999). Frog lives in water as well outside. The amount of time that frogs spend in the water varies a great deal from frog to frog. So me frogs live in water most of the time whereas some live outside. They are carnivores and eat worms, spiders, fish, snails, and other small insects. They live in such environments where they can easily get their prey. They have good eyesight and a sticky tongue which help them get their prey easily. Frog’s eyes also help it take its prey into its belly. â€Å"Frogs' eyes have a surprising auxiliary function: they help in swallowing† (Anonymous, 1999). If we talk about the skin of a frog, we can say that the skin plays a vital role in the survival of a frog. The skin helps a frog breathe and drink. It is a fact that frogs cannot drink water. Therefore, their skin helps the take required moisture inside. The skin also helps frogs take oxygen in the body. Frogs need extra oxygen which their lungs are not able to take. Therefore, the skin of a frog helps it take required amount of extra oxygen that is needed for respiration. A frog also eats its skin once a week. It is a fact that frogs shed their skin once a week while blending, twisting, and stretching. They eat their old skin once they pull it off. Frogs need both soil and water for survival. They do not lay their eggs in soil. The reason is that their eggs do not have any kind of protective shell which can save them properly. Therefore, they lay their eggs in water because water protects their eggs from drying up. Frogs need a pollution free environment to survive. Although they can live in mud but the condition is that the mud should be free of harmful contaminants. Pollutants, such as, pesticides and insect killer sprays are very harmful for their survival because they contaminate the water in which frogs live. â€Å"Declines in amphibian numbers and increases in deformed bodies

In the UK, ethical businesses are not as successful as less ethical Essay - 5

In the UK, ethical businesses are not as successful as less ethical business - Essay Example Customers sometimes pay premium prices for products from socially responsible organizations but may also punish those businesses that are not socially responsible. However, I am in full support of the argument that â€Å"in the UK, Ethical businesses are not as successful as less ethical businesses.† McMurrian & Matulich (2006) say that changing business environment as a result of competition is making business organizations to change their strategies so as to achieve strategic fit. Ideally, being ethical is supposed to help businesses to gain consumer trust. This is aimed at increasing sale of products (p.11). An ethical business not only cares about its perception by the society but also cares about its employees. This means that if it treats its employees ethically, they become satisfied, loyal and productive, produce quality service and reach their highest level of capability. An ethical business also cares about their customers and for this they gain customer satisfaction and loyalty which translates to profitability (p.12). However, there are some organizations in the UK which do not operate ethically yet they continue making profits year after year. Reese (2010) gives McDonalds as an example; this organization has a negative impact on the environment in many ways. To star t with, it usually consumes large amounts of energy in form of electricity in order to run its multiple retail outlets. Pollution from the factories which produce its products is another and not mentioning the wastes as a result of the food produced. However, it still continues to rack profits annually because people can’t help themselves when it comes to eating their fast foods. McDonalds also purchases their products from privatized farmlands which is good. However, some of these farmlands at some point had been a rainforests. This cannot be directly attributed to

The Stone Angel Essay -- English Literature Essays

The Stone Angel Self-Inflicted Isolation and Loneliness â€Å"I never realized until this moment how cut off I am.† (Laurence, 1988, 294) In the novel The Stone Angel, author Margaret Laurence portrays a lonely old woman by the name of Hagar. Over the course of the novel, Hagar reflects back on the memories that have created the story of her life. Hagar is a deeply lonely woman, and much of that loneliness is self-inflicted. This mental isolation is caused by her stubbornness, her pride, and the blindness that she has towards any opinion other than her own. Hagar Currie-Shipley is a very stubborn woman at the age of ninety. She is very set in her ways, and does not appreciate being told what to do. The reader is introduced to this stubbornness when Hagar is brought to Silverthreads nursing home to view the location. Upon this discovery, Hagar attempts to run away, only to find herself lost in a forest. However, this stubbornness is not a new characteristic of Hagar’s, for she has been this way since early childhood. I wouldn’t let him see me cry, I was so enraged. He used a foot ruler, and when I jerked my smarting palms back, he made me hold them out again. He looked at my dry eyes in fury, as though he’d failed unless he drew water from them. He struck and struck, and then all at once he threw the ruler down and put his arms around me†¦ â€Å"You take after me,† he said, as though that made everything clear. â€Å"You’ve got backbone, I’ll give you that.† (Laurence, 1988, 9-10) This passage shows Hagar’s ability to hide her true emotions, which is a tool that she uses a lot later on in life. She later talks of making love to her husband, Bram, stating that even when she did enjoy it, â€Å"He never knew. I never let him know. I never spoke aloud, and I made certain the trembling was all inner.† (Laurence, 1988, 81) Also, early on in life, when her brother Dan was dying of pneumonia, she could not bring herself to perform his final wish. He cried for his dead mother, and Matt had asked Hagar to wear an old shawl, to act as their mother, and hold Dan, but Hagar could not bear the thought of portraying someone as weak as her mother. Her heart seems to be made of stone, much like the stone angel that her father had imported from Italy for her mother’s grave. Hagar kept all of her emotions bottled up inside. After Bram died, she did not allow herself to cry. It w... ...d to send Arlene to Toronto. When John tells Hagar about the move Hagar pretends to know nothing about it. John informs her that she â€Å" ‘always bet on the wrong horse,’ John said gently. ‘Marv was your boy, but you never saw that, did you?’† (Laurence, 1988, 237) it really opens Hagar’s eyes. She realizes that she has been wrong in her favoritism, although she will not admit it until later on after John is dead. When she is lying in her hospital bed many years later, she lets this realization be known, telling Marvin â€Å" ‘You’ve not been cranky, Marvin. You’ve been good to me, always. A better son than John.’† (Laurence, 1988, 305) Sometimes these realizations come too late. The self-inflicted isolation that Hagar feels is a result of her stubbornness, pride, and blindness towards other views. Her past has shaped her to become the bitter, stolid, rigid old woman that she is in the novel, also greatly contributing to her mental isolation. This isolation is a result of the personal decisions and actions that she has made throughout the course of the novel. â€Å"Every last one of them has gone and left me. I never left them. It was the other way around, I swear it.† (Laurence, 1988, 164) The Stone Angel Essay -- English Literature Essays The Stone Angel Self-Inflicted Isolation and Loneliness â€Å"I never realized until this moment how cut off I am.† (Laurence, 1988, 294) In the novel The Stone Angel, author Margaret Laurence portrays a lonely old woman by the name of Hagar. Over the course of the novel, Hagar reflects back on the memories that have created the story of her life. Hagar is a deeply lonely woman, and much of that loneliness is self-inflicted. This mental isolation is caused by her stubbornness, her pride, and the blindness that she has towards any opinion other than her own. Hagar Currie-Shipley is a very stubborn woman at the age of ninety. She is very set in her ways, and does not appreciate being told what to do. The reader is introduced to this stubbornness when Hagar is brought to Silverthreads nursing home to view the location. Upon this discovery, Hagar attempts to run away, only to find herself lost in a forest. However, this stubbornness is not a new characteristic of Hagar’s, for she has been this way since early childhood. I wouldn’t let him see me cry, I was so enraged. He used a foot ruler, and when I jerked my smarting palms back, he made me hold them out again. He looked at my dry eyes in fury, as though he’d failed unless he drew water from them. He struck and struck, and then all at once he threw the ruler down and put his arms around me†¦ â€Å"You take after me,† he said, as though that made everything clear. â€Å"You’ve got backbone, I’ll give you that.† (Laurence, 1988, 9-10) This passage shows Hagar’s ability to hide her true emotions, which is a tool that she uses a lot later on in life. She later talks of making love to her husband, Bram, stating that even when she did enjoy it, â€Å"He never knew. I never let him know. I never spoke aloud, and I made certain the trembling was all inner.† (Laurence, 1988, 81) Also, early on in life, when her brother Dan was dying of pneumonia, she could not bring herself to perform his final wish. He cried for his dead mother, and Matt had asked Hagar to wear an old shawl, to act as their mother, and hold Dan, but Hagar could not bear the thought of portraying someone as weak as her mother. Her heart seems to be made of stone, much like the stone angel that her father had imported from Italy for her mother’s grave. Hagar kept all of her emotions bottled up inside. After Bram died, she did not allow herself to cry. It w... ...d to send Arlene to Toronto. When John tells Hagar about the move Hagar pretends to know nothing about it. John informs her that she â€Å" ‘always bet on the wrong horse,’ John said gently. ‘Marv was your boy, but you never saw that, did you?’† (Laurence, 1988, 237) it really opens Hagar’s eyes. She realizes that she has been wrong in her favoritism, although she will not admit it until later on after John is dead. When she is lying in her hospital bed many years later, she lets this realization be known, telling Marvin â€Å" ‘You’ve not been cranky, Marvin. You’ve been good to me, always. A better son than John.’† (Laurence, 1988, 305) Sometimes these realizations come too late. The self-inflicted isolation that Hagar feels is a result of her stubbornness, pride, and blindness towards other views. Her past has shaped her to become the bitter, stolid, rigid old woman that she is in the novel, also greatly contributing to her mental isolation. This isolation is a result of the personal decisions and actions that she has made throughout the course of the novel. â€Å"Every last one of them has gone and left me. I never left them. It was the other way around, I swear it.† (Laurence, 1988, 164)

Explain what Plato meant by the Form of the Good Essay

Plato was an Ancient Greek philosopher whose writings and theories have greatly influenced the development of Western philosophy. Perhaps his most famous theory is that of the Forms – pure ideas or concepts of what a THING is. It was Plato’s belief that as well as this world, the material world – or the world of Appearances, as he called it – there exists another dimension, where the true Forms of everything in the material world reside; Reality, or the realm of the Forms. A Form, by Plato’s reckoning, is eternal, perfect and unchanging, unlike the images or shadows of Forms that we see in the world of Appearances. In the material world, nothing is perfect, everything changes and eventually everything dies. However, Plato was a dualist, so he believed that as well as our mortal body we also have an immortal soul which existed before and will exist after our time in this world of appearances. The place where our souls resided before we were born and will return to when we die is the realm of the Forms. This, according to Plato explains why we have an innate (though dim) recollection of what Forms are, and why we can recognize things like beauty and justice without being taught. Plato believed that the true philosopher was the one who knew about the Forms and was trying to appreciate and understand the Form of the Good. The Form of the Good is the highest in Plato’s hierarchy of Forms, the highest reality. It is the source and the unity of all the other Forms, and illuminates them so that if one has understanding of the Form of the Good, they have understanding of all the Forms. In Plato’s analogy of the Cave, the Good is represented by the Sun, which is the source of all the objects that the escaped prisoner finds above ground. The Sun makes all the things above ground visible, just like the Form of the Good makes all the other Forms understandable. The Analogy of the Sun by Plato tells us more about the Form of the Good. Plato believed that sight was the â€Å"most noble† of the five senses, because the other four require only two things, a sensor and a sensed (eg. an ear and a sound, a nose and a smell). Sight, however, requires three: an eye, a thing to be seen and the sun to provide light and make it possible for the eye to see it. Plato likens sight to reason; reason requires somebody to understand/to be enlightened, a thing to understand, and the Good to make it possible to understand it. The Form of the Good cannot ever be wholly present in the world of Appearances; however it can, like the other Forms, be reflected in a variety of ways. This, Plato argues, is the reason why we can call so many different things â€Å"good† – because they all correspond to the true reality of goodness at least in part. A cake can be called â€Å"good† if it satisfies someone’s hunger and pleases their taste buds; a chair can be called â€Å"good† if it is comfortable and doesn’t break when you sit on it; a person can be called â€Å"good† if they are kind to others, or if they volunteer in developing countries. But the Form of Good is all of these things, and more than all of these things, says Plato, and because all the Forms come from the Form of Good, every time Truth or Beauty or Justice is reflected in the world of Appearances, Good is being reflected too. Some people think that Plato’s theory of the Form of the Good doesn’t work, because, they argue, around the world and through the ages there are different concepts and understandings of what it means to be good or what a good thing is, so there cannot possibly be a perfect singular Good to which all these different actions and people agree with. These people are known as moral relativists and they do not believe there is absolute morality, rather one must decide what is right and wrong from the particular situation they are in. For example, in some cultures, it is never a good thing to take a life, even if that person has done terrible things including taking lives themselves. However, in other cultures, if the person has done terrible things society will agree that they should be executed for the good of the rest of society and to protect them from future crimes that the person could commit in the future. Plato was a moral absolutist, someone who does believe in a total, unchanging good. Moral absolutists would argue that just because not every culture recognizes the true goodness for what it is, that doesn’t make it any less good.

A Streetcar Named Desire Final Scene

Scene eleven (in some editions it is labeled as Act III Scene Five) of A Streetcar Named Desire takes place a few days after Blanche DuBois was raped by Stanley Kowalski. In between scene ten and eleven, how has Blanche processed the sexual assault? It seems that she has told her sister, Stella. however, having returned from the hospital with her first born child, and being fully aware that Blanche has become mentally unstable, Stella has chosen not to believe her story. Miss DuBois Is Being Sent Away Blanche still clings to fantasy, telling others that she is expecting to go away on a trip with her wealthy gentleman friend. During the last few days, Blanche has probably been maintaining her frail illusions to the best of her ability, staying hidden as best she can in the spare room, trying to hold onto what little privacy she has left. How has Stanley been behaving since the rape? The scene begins with yet another macho poker night. Stanley demonstrates no regret, no transformation -- his conscience seems a blank slate. Stella is waiting for a psychiatric doctor to arrive and take Blanche away to an asylum. She contemplates with her neighbor Eunice, wondering if she is doing the right thing. She refers to ​Blanches rape: Stella: I couldnt believe her story and go on living with Stanley! (Breaks, turns to Eunice, who takes her in her arms.) Eunice: (Holding Stella close.) Dont you ever believe it. Youve got to keep on goin honey. No matter what happens, weve all got to keep on going. Blanche steps out of the bathroom. The stage directions explain that there is a tragic radiance about her. The sexual assault seems to have pushed her further into delusion. Blanche fantasies (and probably believes) that she will soon be traveling on the sea. She imagines dying at sea, killed by the unwashed grape from the French Market, and compares the color of the ocean to that of her first loves eyes. The Strangers Arrive A psychiatric doctor and nurse arrive to take Blanche to a hospital for mental patients. At first, Blanche thinks that her wealthy friend Shep Huntleigh has arrived. However, once she sees the strange woman she begins to panic. She runs back into the bedroom. When she claims to have forgotten something, Stanley cooly explains, Now Blanche -- you left nothing here but split talcum and old empty perfume bottles, unless its the paper lantern you want to take with you. This suggests that Blanches entire life offers nothing of lasting value. The paper lantern is a device she has used to shield her looks and her life from the harsh light of reality. One last time, Stanley shows his addict disdain for her by tearing the lantern off of the light bulb and casting it down. Blanche grabs the lantern and tries to run away, but she is grappled by the nurse, and then all hell breaks loose: Stella screams and pleads for her sisters well-being.Eunice holds Stella back.Mitch, blaming the situation on his friend, attacks Stanley.The doctor enters and eventually calms Blanche (and everyone else). After looking at the kind doctor, Blanches demeanor changes. She actually smiles and says the plays famous line, Whoever you are - I have always depended on the kindness of strangers. The doctor and nurse lead her from the apartment. Stella, still wracked with mixed emotions, calls to her sister, but Blanche ignores her, perhaps now forever lost in her illusions. The Films Ending Vs. The Plays Final Moments It is important to note that in the Elia Kazan film, Stella seems to blame and reject Stanley. The movie adaptation implies that Stella will no longer trust her husband, and might actually leave him. However, in Tennessee Williams original play, the story ends with Stanley taking his sobbing with into his arms and soothingly saying: Now, honey. Now, love. The curtain falls as the men resume their poker game. Throughout the play, many of Blanche DuBois words and actions denote her revulsion of truth and reality. As she often states, she would much rather have magic, much rather live a fanciful lie rather than deal with the ugliness of the real world. And yet, Blanche is not the only delusional character in the play. Delusion and Denial During the final scene of A Streetcar Named Desire, the audience witnesses Stella adopting the delusion that her husband is trustworthy, that he did not, in fact, rape her sister. When Eunice says, No matter what happens, weve all got to keep going, she is preaching the virtues of self-deception. Tell yourself whatever you need to in order to sleep at night, in order to carry on with each day. Mitch adopts the delusion that Stanley is the only one responsible for Blanches undoing, eschewing any moral responsibility. Finally, even Stanley himself, the masculine character who prides himself on being down-to-earth, at facing life for what it is, falls prey to delusions. For one, he has always been more than a bit paranoid about her intentions, believing that Blanche has been trying to usurp him from his role as king of his castle. Just before raping Blanche he declares, Weve had this date with each other from the beginning, implying that Blanche has complied with the sexual act -- another delusion. Even in the last scene, while witnessing Blanches mental frailty in all its pathos, Stanley still believes that he has done nothing wrong. His powers of denial are stronger than that of Blanche DuBois. Unlike Stanley, she cannot skirt regret and guilt; they will continue to haunt her no matter how many illusions (or paper lanterns) she creates.