How to Get Stress Relief With Cognitive Therapy

How to Get Stress Relief With Cognitive Therapy Psychotherapy Print How Cognitive Therapy Works for Stress Relief By Elizabeth Scott, MS twitter Elizabeth Scott, MS, is a wellness coach specializing in stress management and quality of life, and the author of 8 Keys to Stress Management. Learn about our editorial policy Elizabeth Scott, MS Updated on February 07, 2020 Tetra images/Getty Images More in Psychotherapy Online Therapy Negative thoughts can create more stress in our lives. Not only can negative affect, or being in a bad mood, color our experience so that many of the things we experience seem more stressful and even overwhelming, but our bad mood can be contagious, and can even cause others to treat us in a less friendly way, perpetuating negativity in us and virtually everyone we encounter, to a degree. It is easy to get trapped into the habit of thinking negatively, and changing those thought processes is a goal in cognitive therapy. Many people have found this to be a useful tool in their stress management strategy. Cognitive therapy has been found to be effective in the treatment of many issues such as anxiety disorders, depression, and even severe stress.?? Whether the stress is contributing to mood disorders or is just creating unpleasant feelings that are interfering with a happy lifestyle, cognitive therapy (or a mix of cognitive and behavioral therapy) can be a very effective mode of treatment. The Idea Behind Cognitive Therapy Cognitive therapy for stress rests on the premise that it’s not simply the events in our lives that cause us stress, it’s the way we think about them.?? For example, two people may be caught in traffic. One person could view this situation as an opportunity to listen to music or get lost in thought and become (or remain) relaxed. Another person may focus on the wasted time or the feeling of being trapped, and become distressed. There are hundreds of examples of how our thoughts and our negative self-talk color our experiences. These can lead to a triggered stress response or a calm demeanor. Virtually all of the thought patterns that negatively impact our experiences can be categorized into one of 10  common cognitive distortions.?? Therapists using a cognitive approach work with clients to recognize and alter these habitually negative thought patterns. You can also work on some of them at home. Cognitive Restructuring for Stress Relief Using Cognitive Therapy for Stress Relief Many people have found a cognitive approach to be wonderfully helpful and much quicker than most therapeutic approaches. There is no standard length or number of cognitive therapy sessions needed for the treatment of stress.?? It depends on what your needs are. After a few sessions, some people see improvement. Other people may need months of therapy before they feel better.   This is significantly  faster than the years-on-the-couch rate of psychoanalytic therapy, which is what many people still think of when they think of going to a shrink. Support for the effectiveness of this approach comes from research on optimistic and pessimistic explanatory styles.?? It is also revealed by the positive results that come from cognitive therapy for stress, or a mix of cognitive and behavioral therapy. Cognitive therapy has also been combined with the practice of mindfulness. This created  mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT), which has shown promising effects as well.?? Giving It a Try When interviewing potential therapists, ask about their experience with this approach. You can also search out someone who specializes in cognitive therapeutic interventions. If you’re not interested in seeing a therapist at this point but would like to use some cognitive techniques to reduce your stress levels, you can begin at home. Discover how to  change your habitual thought patterns in the interest of stress relief. How Positive Thinking Impacts Stress

How Wilfred Owen Uses Language and Imagery in His Poetry...

How Wilfred Owen Uses Language and Imagery in His Poetry to Communicate his Attitudes of War Wilfred Owen was concerned to emphasise the hardships and trials of the soldiers who fought in the First World War. Wilfred Owen, who died subsequently after receiving mortal wounds while in combat in the war, had some strong viewpoints and messages about war which he tried to convey through his poetry. He had three main viewpoints which included most or all of his feelings. These were firstly, that war is futile and pointless; secondly that men lose their humanity and dignity through war; finally, he wants combat the Government propaganda that painted a sweet picture of war. He wanted to convey a message†¦show more content†¦It does this by describing the winds as kniving the men as if they were actually fighting them. Another point that Owen highlights is how the soldiers are treated poorly and that they lose their humanity and dignity. This is illustrated by the first line of the poem Anthem for Doomed Youth which describes the young soldiers as; What passing-bells for these who die as cattle? This makes the soldiers seem like mere animals and it conveys the idea that war has reduced them to low intelligence creatures, such as cattle, so they seem to have lost all humanity. Also the sentence describes how the young soldiers wont get the stereotypical heros funeral but they will just stay where they fall. In this poem is also emphasises this point in the lines; Nor any voice of mourning save the choirs,- The shrill, demented choirs of wailing shells; It adds emphasis by expressing the idea that they wont get splendid choirs to sing at their funerals but instead they will get the shrill, demented choirs of wailing shells, the use of such explicit and strong words helps to put extra power behind the its meaning; which is to convey a sense that dead soldiers only comfort is the awful sounds ofShow MoreRelatedAnalysis Of Wilfred Owen s Poem Dulce Et Decorum Est1692 Words   |  7 Pagesback to the Poetry and Society unit of the literature topic. We are moving on from last week’s poetry type, American slam and we are now studying Protest and Resistance poetry. The protest poem ‘Dulce et Decorum Est’, written by Wilfred Owen, challenges the dominant World War One ideologies of militarism and nationalism. You will find that this poem is a great example as it defies the dominant values and beliefs of war in Britain. Wilfred Owen Let’s discuss the poet. Wilfred Owen was one of theRead MoreA Comparison Between Wilfred Owen’s ‘Dulce Et Decorum Est’ and ‘Anthem for Doomed Youth’ and Siegfried Sassoon’s ‘Does It Matter?’ and ‘Suicide in the Trenches’1991 Words   |  8 PagesWilfred Owen’s ‘Dulce et Decorum Est’ and ‘Anthem for Doomed Youth’ are both poems that protest against and depict the subject of war. They both follow Wilfred Owen’s angst against those who encourage war and the savagery of warfare that he experienced himself. His poetry was devised to strike at the conscience of England during the World War. Owen’s mother had encouraged him to write poetry from an early age and when he was old enough he travelled to France to teach English when the war brokeRead MorePoetry and War1681 Words   |  7 PagesHow does Owen explore the themes of war through the power of his poetry? Written by: vdg How does Owen explore the themes of war through the power of his poetry? Answer Q Owen expresses the themes of war through the unique power of poetry. Both the mental and physical brutality of war is emphasised in the poems, â€Å"The Send off,† â€Å"Anthem for doomed youth† and â€Å"Spring Offensive,† furthering the responder’s understanding of a soldier’s life on the western front. Owen employs various poetic devices

Analysis Of The Book Big Two Hearted River - 1600 Words

According to Hemingway biographer James R. Mellon, Hemingway regarded Big Two-Hearted River as the climactic story in [his short story collection] In Our Time and the culminating episode in the Nick Adams adventures that he included in the book. That comment ought to spark the curiosity of readers of this story, for, on the surface, very little happens in the story. Seemingly, it goes nowhere. If, however, one has read Thoreau s Walden, it is relatively easy to see that Hemingway is portraying Nick Adams attempt to achieve a bonding with nature that Thoreau, in 1845, was seeking when he decided to live a simple, semi-solitary life at Walden Pond. In Walden, Thoreau says: I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately .†¦show more content†¦Ultimately, the traditional Christian symbols of fishing and water become symbolic of Nick s being rebaptized into life. However, even though two prominent Western world symbols have been mentioned thus far, this is not a story whose meaning relies on symbols. Instead, it is a realistic account of a fishing trip during which Nick regains control of his life. Two major, over-arching themes can be seen in each part: recovery in Part I and recollection in Part II. Nick s recovery begins here as Nick goes alone to a deserted area along the fictional Two-Hearted River (Michigan s Fox River) in the upper peninsula of northern Michigan, where he can see Lake Superior from a hilltop, where there was no town, nothing but the rails and the burned-over country. . . . It was all that was left of the town of Seney. The symbolism here is fairly obvious: Nick is leaving the burned, destroyed portions of his life behind, hoping and searching for renewal on the rich, green, and fertile river bank of the big Two-Hearted River. Nick, however, does not go immediately to the river; instead, he gets off the train and pauses on a bridge, watching trout that are far below him in the stream. It is important to note here that Nick is looking down onto the river and the trout, which

Essay on Brave New World Sacrifising Free Will - 1767 Words

Aldous Huxley created a literary masterpiece which shows a possible, dismal future produced by the misuse of science and technology. In his book, Brave New World, the World Controllers use various scientific methods to dehumanize the population in order to control them. The advanced use of biotechnology has allowed the government to completely eliminate family and have the population physically engineered to fit specific specifications according to the needs of society. They also use different methods of brainwashing in order to ensure the population properly conforms to their outline of civilization. Through the use of primitive conditioning techniques combined with current ones, everything the people think, like, and dislike is†¦show more content†¦Bokonavosky’s Process is used to turn one fertilized egg into as many as ninety six embryos using, â€Å"a series of arrests in development,† such as X-ray treatment, freezing and thawing, and alcohol poisoning (Hu xley 6). This process does significantly weaken the embryos which is why it is only used on the lower classes. Through this process, identical twins are created, â€Å"by scores at a time† (Huxley 7). This, combined with the Podsnaps Technique which causes egg cells to rapidly be produced, can turn out an average of about eleven thousand people from just one ovary (Huxley 6-8). Occasionally, the embryos are even further conditioned by methods such as depriving them of oxygen in order to lower their intelligence (Huxley 14). These assorted biotechnologies play a major role in dehumanizing the population. The World Controllers predetermine what role their people will play in society and they often condition them for that role. The people never get a chance to find their own place in the world based on their personal desires, wishes, and dreams. The government has completely taken away their free will to choose what they want to do with their lives. This decision is one of the g reatest personal choices a person can make and the fact that the government does not even acknowledge it shows a terrible disrespect towards the general population. Leon R. Kass, who once advised President George W. Bush on bioethical issues, stated that

UVA- My Favorite Word free essay sample

What is your favorite word and why? My favorite word? Receipt. Of course, highly descriptive adjectives such as â€Å"incandescent,† â€Å"melancholic,† and â€Å"axiomatic† carry more ‘wow’ factor. But besides the obvious reasons, such as the way its silent ‘p’ dances, hidden, on a speaker’s lips, â€Å"receipt† reflects certain crucial aspects of my character. (Warning: the deed which I am about to confess may horrify some readers.) I planned my college application process on the back of a tiny, slightly creased Chinese restaurant receipt. Admittedly, this action seems quite unorganized and arbitrary, but more importantly, it mimics my inventive, carefree personality. In the past, I have tried to substitute a weekly planner and desktop calendar for my little receipt, but both alternatives failed to cooperate with my disposition. After covering the desk calendar with doodles and the weekly planner with pictures of friends, I decided to throw away both products with the half-hearted intention to try them again another day. We will write a custom essay sample on UVA- My Favorite Word or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page That fateful Chinese restaurant receipt did not include in its list of purchases my fortune cookie, the inscribed adage of which reminded me that â€Å"a closed mind is like a closed book; just like a block of wood.† Even after my eternally ravenous Labrador took the liberty of swallowing the little piece of paper, I remembered its beautifully simple message. In life, I like to keep my mind as open as an open book, for it is only in this state that I may truly evolve as an individual, using the powers of optimism to skip off blissfully in the direction of my dreams.

The Nature of the Beast and Harassment Blues free essay sample

A discussion on the views of two contrasting authors Anita Hill and Naomi Munson on ethics in sexual harassment. The following paper compares the way in which Anita Hill and Naomi Munson formulate their arguments in their articles The Nature of the Beast (Anita Hill) and Harassment Blues (Naomi Munson). The writer argues that neither Hill nor Munson look at society as a whole, since both authors focus on the sexual harassment of women, without mentioning cases where men are the victims. This paper asserts that their approach is based more on the rights of the individual and a pro or anti-feminist stance than on any utilitarian or egalitarian perspective. Sexual harassment can be seen on many levels as down to the views of individuals. However, there is also a degree of ethical value involved as what one person may perceive as a bawdy joke, another may take as sexual harassment. We will write a custom essay sample on The Nature of the Beast and Harassment Blues or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page To achieve fairness though, society does not just consider the views of individuals, but instead tends to look upon the needs of the whole. This means that for the greater good of society the needs of all are greater than those of a single person and this can be related to utilitarianism. The basis of this doctrine is that the value of any item or service is determined only by its usefulness. In adopting this philosophy a state should pursue actions that will bring about the most benefit to the largest number of citizens. In utilitarianism the greatest benefit is seen as the actions that result in the greatest happiness, which by any interpretation is a controversial view.

An inspector calls is a play by JB Priestley Essay Example

An inspector calls is a play by JB Priestley Essay Example An inspector calls is a play by JB Priestley Essay An inspector calls is a play by JB Priestley Essay Essay Topic: Literature An inspector calls is a play by JB Priestley. It is set in 1912 but was written in 1945, just months after the end of World War II. It was no coincidence however, that Priestley chose to write the play at this time, it was indeed his deliberate action to publish it at such a vulnerable time. England was currently undergoing a period of great social and political change. And as many people had been affected by the war and the nation in need of drastic renovation, most people were leaning towards the introduction of a more socialist government in hope that it would draw a finer line between the extremely wealthy and the poor. However, much of the middle and upper classes still remained faithful to the ideals of capitalism, whereas Priestley, himself coming from a modest background, also favoured the ideals of socialism, many of which are presented in the play. Priestleys political views had also been very much influenced by major incidents that had occurred throughout his life. Born in 1894, he would have himself been a witness to both world wars, which would have had a great impact on his social outlook. The depression of the 1930s would also have changed his views or shed new light on how he believed society should operate. After the Wall Street crash in 1929, millions of Americans were in desperate need of financial help from the government. However, the current government, under Herbert Hoover, disapproved of such involvement in its citizens lives. His capitalist ideal of rugged individualism encouraged the belief of every man for himself. Of course this had worked fine throughout the boom of the 1920s where people did not necessitate government aid, but now as people were starving and being evicted from their homes, rugged individualism was doomed for failure. However, when FDR Roosevelt was elected in 1929, major improvements were made within the space of a year. FDR believed in having a closer relationship with his people, he believed in everybody having more of a collective responsibility. Billions of dollars were spent on setting up major projects including numerous agencies which each dealt with separate areas of unemployment. These attempts to resuscitate America worked, unemployment fell steadily down and America gradually returned to more or less how it had been in the early 1920s. Having lived through such times would have caused Priestley to take mental note of such significant events, the depression would only have strengthened his belief in socialism and collective responsibility. The play therefore, was written primarily as a vehicle for Priestleys social comment, and as the election of 1945 was steadily approaching, he chose to publish it at this time in an attempt to influence peoples ideas. The novel was written in the form of a play in order to convey this political message to the desired audience. During the period that the play was written, the theatre was mostly frequented by the upper and middle classes, and so this would seemingly be the most direct way of putting such a message across. However, Priestley had to be very careful about how he went about this. If the audience realised that they were in fact being lectured, the play would not prove to be very popular and become unsuccessful in achieving its objective. Priestley therefore disguised his message in the form of a play about a middle class man and his family. The curtain opens on the dining room of a fairly large suburban house. This setting is constant throughout and is only altered in terms of light. The family is celebrating Sheilas engagement to Gerald, Mr Birlings daughter and business competitor. The lighting at first is soft and pink, and the furniture both cosy and typical of the period. This familiar atmosphere would instantly put the audience at ease with what they are seeing, it would have been a familiar scene with which most of the audience could relate and feel comfortable with. Priestley used this technique specifically as a way of putting the audiences guard down, in order for them to fully absorb the social message that arises later in the play. In other words, the audience is now more susceptible to Priestleys message. The first character we are presented with is Mr Birling, we are told in the opening stage directions that he is a rather portentous man, and indeed his speeches would seem to reflect that. He states very briefly how glad he is about the engagement and then moves on to a speech about how Sheila and Gerald are marrying at a time of steadily increasing prosperity. We soon begin to realise that Mr Birling is a very opinionated man, but also begin to wonder how worthwhile his opinions actually are: Youll hear some people say wars inevitable, and to that I say fiddlesticks! The Germans dont want war. Nobody wants war His speeches give us an impression of a pompous, dogmatic man who only seems to value his own opinion: The titanic she sails next week forty six thousand eight hundred tons -New York in five days and every luxury and unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable. Of course these quotes would be very ironic for the audience as they all know that both the sinking of the titanic and war did in fact occur; this is known as dramatic irony. Other statements also seem to suggest that Mr Birling simply sees the marriage as a way of becoming socially mobile: Your father and I have been business rivals for some time now though Crofts Limited are both older and bigger than Birling and Company and now youve brought us together, and perhaps we may look forward to the time when Crofts and Birlings are no longer competing, but working together, for lower costs and igher prices. Not only do Birlings speeches make us realise how arrogant and futile his opinions are, but they also reveal that he is in fact a staunch capitalist; he does try to justify his opinions but also entirely neglects the fact that not everybody has equal opportunities in life. He ignores the fact that not everybody can work hard to achieve to success, as not everybody has the privilege of an education or even a job to work hard in: Youd think that everybody had to look after everybody, as if we were all mixed up together like bees in a hive community and all that nonsense. Priestley uses an interesting device in this quote, he actually paradoxes himself as a way of challenging the middle class values; the way some of these cranks talk these days He also mentions other authors prior to himself who had very similar values to him: We cant let these Bernard Shaws and HG Wellses do all the talking. We hard- headed practical businessmen must say something sometime. At this point, conveniently in the middle of one of Birlings capitalist speeches, an inspector intrudes on the evenings celebrations. The lights become harder and brighter at his entrance, as a way of signifying a powerful presence. However, this could also be criticised for making the audience feel uncomfortable with the inspectors presence, possibly making them more resistant or reluctant to accept his message. The inspector in the play is a powerful, or rather omniscient figure who is used as a vehicle to promote the authorial viewpoint. And although most of the audience will at present not be aware that they are in fact being openly criticised or challenged, some may have picked it up when Mr Birling, an obvious representation of the upper classes, was being ridiculed in his speeches. The Inspector arrives at the scene concerning the suicide of a young girl called Eva Smith; who died earlier that evening after drinking a large dose of strong disinfectant in an act of suicide. And although Mr Birling is reluctant to answer questions on such an occasion, the inspectors persistence and immunity to Birlings hints of his friendship to Chief Colonel Roberts force him to undergo an interview with the inspector. After questioning, it is revealed that Mr Birling did in fact know Eva Smith, she had been a worker at his factory before he fired her two years ago. When Birling is asked why, he admits that she was a good worker, but he was forced to sack her because she had had the audacity to ask for higher wages. He is at this point confronted by his own son, Eric, who thinks that his father was wrong for sacking Eva Smith simply because she had more charisma than the others; Why shouldnt she try for higher wages? We try for the highest possible prices You said yourself she was a good worker. What Priestley was trying to convey here, was his belief that the younger generation offered more optimism to the ideas of socialism, and that social views in society were beginning to change. This is further reinforced when we meet Sheila, Mr Birlings daughter. Mr Birling however, continues to completely deny any responsibility on Eva Smiths suicide, stating that he had sacked her nearly two years ago, and that he could therefore have nothing to do with the suicide whatsoever. The inspector however, seems to disagree: What happened to her then may have determined what happened to her afterwards, and what happened to her afterwards may have driven her to suicide. A chain of events. At this point Sheila enters, completely oblivious to the inspectors arrival. When told of her fathers actions however, she agrees with Eric and the inspector, and seems to sympathise greatly with the death of the poor girl: But these girls arent cheap labour, theyre people. Sheila gives the impression of a caring, compassionate young girl, but in retrospective irony, the audience will soon realise how improper her words are. After some persuasion from the inspector, Mr Birling allows his daughter to be questioned. The inspector had previously mentioned that after having been fired from Birling and Co. Eva Smith was out of work for two months, and having no parents or home to go back to, she lived in lodgings with the little money she had saved from working at the factory. It so happened however that she had a wonderful stroke of luck and found a job at Milwards, a popular and somewhat prestigious fashion store of the time. However, after about a couple of months, just as she felt that she was settling down nicely, they told her she had to go. It was admitted that it had nothing to do with how Eva was working, but that a customer had made a complaint and so she would have to leave. Upon hearing this Sheila becomes uneasy and asks what the girl looked like, the inspector moves nearer towards a light and shows her a photograph of Eva, at which Sheila gives a little cry and rushes out of the room. When later Sheila is confronted with her actions, amidst repentant pleas she admits that she complained to the manager of Milwards because she had been jealous of Eva: The dress suited her, she was the right type for it. She was a very pretty girl too and that didnt make it any better. When I tried the thing on I knew it was ll wrong, I caught sight of this girl smiling at Miss Francis as if to say, doesnt she look awful and I was absolutely furious. While Priestley still thought that the younger generation provided greater hope for the ideas of socialism, this shows how he felt anyone could fall victim to hypocrisy, and how it would be very easy, however sorry afterwards, for anyone born into such wealth to succumb to the uncontrollable flaws of human nature. The play at this point seems to be that of a straightforward, detective thriller. As each of the characters involvement with Eva Smith is eventually revealed, the structure of the play seems to evolve into one of a whodunit, as each person unravels a piece of Eva Smiths history. The next person to be confronted is Gerald Croft. When it is announced that Eva Smith later changed her name to Daisy Renton he is startled and it becomes quite obvious that he has heard that name before, however he remains silent while the inspector leaves the room. Sheila senses however that something is wrong and forces Gerald into confession. He, or rather Sheila, who unravels the situation herself, reveals that he was in fact having an affair with Daisy for almost six months. Gerald tries to persuade Sheila into keeping this information from the inspector, but in something of a fit of hysteria she points out that he already knows. The omniscient inspector, even through detailed questioning, has not actually discovered anything that he didnt already know. In fact he never actually directly accuses anyone, but somehow, in a somewhat intimidating manner and a disconcerting habit of looking hard at the person he addresses, he is driving them all into confession: Why you fool he knows. Of course he knows. And I hate to think how much he knows that we dont know yet. Youll see. Youll see. Gerald eventually admits his Affair with Daisy, but claims that his initial intentions were good. He explains that after having met her in a bar and discovering that she had no place to live, he offered her some money and temporary stay in an empty friends house. When the inspector asks him if she eventually became his mistress however, he admits: Yes. I suppose it was inevitable. She was young, pretty and warm-hearted and intensely grateful. The act ends when Gerald confesses his affair with Eva Smith to Sheila. Priestley does this deliberately to heighten the audiences suspense with this use of climaxes, always ensuring that they are left with a cliff-hanger at the end of each act. The audiences interest is sustained not only by the progressive revelation of each persons involvement with the suicide, but also the desire to find out who, primarily, was responsible for Eva Smiths death. After Geralds confession, the inspector turns to Mrs Birling. At first she too is extremely reluctant to answer any questions, and also denies recognising the photograph of Eva Smith. But the inspector, in his omniscience, makes Mrs Birling realise that there is no use in denying recognition. The inspector makes her admit that she did in fact know this girl, and that she had refused her help two weeks ago when she had pleaded to her. (She was at the time chair of the Brumley womens charity organisation. ) When asked why, Mrs Birling calmly and unemotionally claims that she did not believe the girls story, and that she also was instantly prejudiced against her as she had enough impudence to give herself the name Birling. It is also revealed that Daisy Renton was in fact pregnant, and even though Mrs Birling was perfectly aware of this, not only did she refuse her help, but she also saw to it that others refused it too. Furthermore she recounts that she couldnt believe the girls story because Daisy had mentioned refusing money from the father of the child as it was stolen, and admittingly, Mrs Birling states that she found this very hard to believe: As if a girl of that sort would refuse money. This comment would seem to insinuate that the working classes have no morals, and would jump at any opportunity, however drastic, for money. However harsh her actions may have been though, Mrs Birling continues to vehemently deny any responsibility for Daisy Rentons death. She has no trouble however, in shifting the blame onto her own husband: And remember before you start accusing me of anything again that it wasnt I who turned her out of her employment, which probably began it all. The inspector then asks Mrs Birling whom she really believes the chief culprit is in the whole ordeal. First, she mentions the girl herself, but when asked to specify, she claims that if Daisys story was true, and the father truly was an immature drunk, then he should be the one to accept the entire blame. Not only does she say that she believes he is the chief culprit, but also makes sure to mention him having to be dealt with very severely. And despite pleas from Sheila for her mother to stop, Mrs Birling says this quite calmly, perfectly unaware that this person is of course, her own son: Mother I begged and begged you to stop But surely I mean its ridiculous I dont believe it, I wont believe it. The curtain opens with Eric entering the room as the others simply stare at him. He seems genuinely distressed and his attitude to the accusations would seem to resemble Sheilas. Erics confession turns out to be the most shocking, as not only do we find out that he is the father of the child, but also that he is a heavy drinker and that he had to even resort to stealing money from his own father. He claims to have met Eva at a bar, where he started talking to her and then they both ended up drunk by the time they had to leave. He remembers little after that, but recounts meeting her again a fortnight later. Once again he drank, but moderately, and so this time remembers going back to her house and making love. After finding out that Daisy was pregnant however, Eric offered to marry her, but she refused, saying that he was speaking out of duty, not of love. Eric however, still felt inclined to give her money until she found a job, and insisted that she accept fifty pounds: And where did you get fifty pounds from? I got it from the office You mean you stole the money? It is at this point that the play reveals its second form that of a morality play. The inspectors final speech claims that while Arthur Birling may have started the whole ordeal, each and everybody in that room was responsible for Eva Smiths suicide. And while it is too late to save Eva, as he claims: There are millions and millions of Eva Smiths and John Smiths still left with us, with their lives, hopes and fears, their suffering and chance, all intertwined with our lives And I tell you that the time will come soon when, if men will ot learn that lesson, then they will be taught it in fire and blood and anguish. Priestleys last comment here would seem to be a reference to world war one, which occurred two years after the play was set. It is important to remember that while these are just characters in a fictional play, Priestley intended each one of them to represent a microcosm of society. Mr Birling is the rather selfish middle class businessman, but who is also seen as quite a laughable or pathetic figure whose opinions are not taken seriously by the audience. Mrs Birling represents the emotionally cold upper class woman who doesnt show the slightest bit of remorse for having turned away a pregnant woman for help, apart from when of-course she discovers shes had a part to play in the death of her own grand-son. Gerald is the young, carefree, well-off businessman who is primarily concerned with his having a good time. And finally, Eric and Sheila both represent the rather hypocritical but altogether more compassionate younger generation. Indeed, when it is eventually discovered that the inspector was not actually an inspector at all, and that no girl had actually committed suicide that day, Sheila and Eric are the only two who still show remorse for their actions: Everything we said had happened really had happened. If it didnt end tragically then thats lucky for us. But it might have done whoever that inspector was, it was anything but a joke. You began to learn something. And now youve stopped. Youre ready to go in the same old way. While Eric and Sheila are still aware of the consequences their actions may have led to, the rest of the family breathe a sigh of relief and talk rather amusedly about the supposed hoax. However, the play ends in a rather unpredictable fashion. Just as Mr Birling is laughing at Eric and Sheila for not being able to take a joke, the phone rings sharply, he answers it, and then turns round in a panic-stricken fashion at the others: That was the police. A girl has just died on her way to the infirmary after swallowing some disinfectant. And a police inspector is coming round to ask some questions As they stare guiltily and dumbfounded, the curtain falls By closing the play in such a way, Priestley has turned the ending itself into a dramatic device. The audience will now leave the theatre wondering what the ending actually meant. Was the inspector a realistic, straightforward police inspector? Was he a hoaxer? Or did he, in his omniscience, represent something supernatural? All these questions are deliberately left unanswered by Priestly so that the audience will leave thinking about the play, and then hopefully, about the message it conveyed.