Free Essays on Holocaust

The Holocaust is likely one of the most misunderstood historical events of modern times. There are those that underestimate the extent of world knowledge about the German atrocities. There are also those whom are ignorant of the way in which the Jews reacted to their situation. The incredible extent of incorrect information about the Holocaust which people have been taught is a severe problem that must be corrected immediately. The only solution is the education of the masses. It is imperative that modern society fully appreciate the terrors of the Holocaust in order to prevent it?s reoccurrence. First and foremost, we must address the fallacies concerning the world?s knowledge of what was happening. It is often assumed and taught that the Holocaust portion of World War II was such a well kept secret that no one knew of it until after the fact, however, this is untrue. There were various ways that the world was notified of these horrors. Various nations and various Jewish communities gained knowledge of the barbarity and did nothing. The powers that be were notified many times of what was going on. On September 29 and 30, 1941 there was a mass killing at Babi Yar, a Russian city near Kiev. Reporters in Kiev were sending the story to their publishers within three days, it was never printed. A Swiss-German industrialist, after having been invited to watch a mass killing, sent photographs to Winston Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, they were ignored. In February 1942, the Vatican and the Red Cross received confirmed reports of the Holocaust. After discussing whether to intervene, they concluded that they had to remain silent, so as not to compromise their neutrality. In July of 1942, news reports of the killings were aired in London, however, nothing came of it because the reports were in French. Head of the CIA, Allen Dulles received an account of the camps from two inmates in 1944. Despite being quote-unquote ?profoundly shocked?... Free Essays on Holocaust Free Essays on Holocaust The Holocaust is likely one of the most misunderstood historical events of modern times. There are those that underestimate the extent of world knowledge about the German atrocities. There are also those whom are ignorant of the way in which the Jews reacted to their situation. The incredible extent of incorrect information about the Holocaust which people have been taught is a severe problem that must be corrected immediately. The only solution is the education of the masses. It is imperative that modern society fully appreciate the terrors of the Holocaust in order to prevent it?s reoccurrence. First and foremost, we must address the fallacies concerning the world?s knowledge of what was happening. It is often assumed and taught that the Holocaust portion of World War II was such a well kept secret that no one knew of it until after the fact, however, this is untrue. There were various ways that the world was notified of these horrors. Various nations and various Jewish communities gained knowledge of the barbarity and did nothing. The powers that be were notified many times of what was going on. On September 29 and 30, 1941 there was a mass killing at Babi Yar, a Russian city near Kiev. Reporters in Kiev were sending the story to their publishers within three days, it was never printed. A Swiss-German industrialist, after having been invited to watch a mass killing, sent photographs to Winston Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, they were ignored. In February 1942, the Vatican and the Red Cross received confirmed reports of the Holocaust. After discussing whether to intervene, they concluded that they had to remain silent, so as not to compromise their neutrality. In July of 1942, news reports of the killings were aired in London, however, nothing came of it because the reports were in French. Head of the CIA, Allen Dulles received an account of the camps from two inmates in 1944. Despite being quote-unquote ?profoundly shocked?... Free Essays on Holocaust The Holocaust is a term that is synonymous with genocide. In the Webster Merriam dictionary this term has two meanings; the first is a sacrifice consumed by fire. The second meaning is a thorough destruction involving extensive loss of life especially through fire. In regards to the historical event known as the Holocaust, the second definition is the most fitting. This definition is appropriate because that is exactly what the Holocaust was: a complete destruction of a sect of people, mainly Jews, through the use of fire (primarily ovens in which their bodies were burned in). When speaking of destruction, it is important to understand that not only were bodies and lives destroyed, but the spirit of the Jewish people was shattered. There are many different questions concerning the Holocaust that have risen overtime. Whether or not the Holocaust ever existed has been debated for decades. To this day people have doubted the actual existence of the Holocaust, as well as the issue of how long the Holocaust was actually around for or when it even started. Not only when, but where it all happen, is also a pertinent part of understanding the full effect of this horrifying period in time. Also another widely held viewpoint and argument was if the Jews resisted or if the Jews succumbed to the Nazi party and Hitler. Within this paper I will confirm that in fact the holocaust actually did happen by discussing the beginning of the holocaust, concentrating on specific camps, and then talking about how it affects the Jewish people today. The holocaust began when a man by the name of Adolf Hitler came into power, and was on a mission to annihilate as much of the Jewish population that he could. Hitler was able to come to power through several different reasons. Long term bitterness, an ineffective constitution, money, propaganda, attacks on other parties, and personal qualities all contributed. Not to mention the fact that Hitler wa... Free Essays on Holocaust The Holocaust is a term that is synonymous with genocide. In the Webster Merriam dictionary this term has two meanings; the first is a sacrifice consumed by fire. The second meaning is a thorough destruction involving extensive loss of life especially through fire. In regards to the historical event known as the Holocaust, the second definition is the most fitting. This definition is appropriate because that is exactly what the Holocaust was: a complete destruction of a sect of people, mainly Jews, through the use of fire (primarily ovens in which their bodies were burned in). When speaking of destruction, it is important to understand that not only were bodies and lives destroyed, but the spirit of the Jewish people was shattered. There are many different questions concerning the Holocaust that have risen overtime. Whether or not the Holocaust ever existed has been debated for decades. To this day people have doubted the actual existence of the Holocaust, as well as the issue of how long the Holocaust was actually around for or when it even started. Not only when, but where it all happen, is also a pertinent part of understanding the full effect of this horrifying period in time. Also another widely held viewpoint and argument was if the Jews resisted or if the Jews succumbed to the Nazi party and Hitler. Within this paper I will confirm that in fact the holocaust actually did happen by discussing the beginning of the holocaust, concentrating on specific camps, and then talking about how it affects the Jewish people today. The holocaust began when a man by the name of Adolf Hitler came into power, and was on a mission to annihilate as much of the Jewish population that he could. Hitler was able to come to power through several different reasons. Long term bitterness, an ineffective constitution, money, propaganda, attacks on other parties, and personal qualities all contributed. Not to mention the fact that Hitler wa... Free Essays on Holocaust The Holocaust during World War II was arguably one of the worst human induced disasters that have happened to the human race. The Holocaust orchestrated by the Nazi Empire destroyed millions of lives and created questions about humanity that may never be answered. Many psychological effects caused by the Holocaust forever changed the way the Jewish people view the world and themselves. The Jewish people have been scarred for generations and may never be able to once again associate with the rest of the free world. Further, these scars have now become the looking glass through which the survivors and their children view the world. Through narrow eyes, the survivors relate everything to the experiences they endured during the Holocaust. Likewise, these new views on the world shapes how the survivors live, interact, and raise a family both socially and spiritually. Some survivors are scarred so deeply they cannot escape the past feelings and images of terror; psychologists call this â €Å"Survivor Syndrome†. A survivor of the war is one who has encountered, been exposed to, or witnessed death, and has himself of herself remained alive. The symptoms affected not only survivors, but their families as well. These symptoms were also caused by some of the horrifying experiences that happened especially to the Jewish women. The symptoms included an inability to work, and even at times to talk. The Jewish people fear that it may happen again. Also a fear of uniformed police officers because of their position of power became very common. There were also many feelings of guilt for having survived when others had not. "Why am I alive?" â€Å"Why not my sister and brother...my whole family?" The Jewish holocaust survivors posed those and other questions. The survivors had thoughts of death, nightmares, panic attacks, and various other symptoms. Disinterest in life, people, and sometimes even in reality played a huge role in marital problems and suicid... Free Essays on Holocaust The world's biggest desolation that caused the murders of millions of Jewish people took place during WWII. The Holocaust orchestrated by the Nazi Empire destroyed millions of lives and created questions about humanity that may never be answered. Many psychological effects caused by the Holocaust forever changed the way the Jewish people view the world and themselves. The Jewish people have been scarred for generations and may never be able to once again associate with the rest of the free world. Further, these scars have now become the looking glass through which the survivors and their children view the world. Through narrow eyes, the survivors relate everything to the experiences they endured during the Holocaust. Likewise, these new views on the world shapes how the survivors live, interact, and raise a family both socially and spiritually. Some survivors are scarred so deeply they can not escape the past feelings and images of terror; they call this Survivor Syndrome. A Survivor is one who has encountered, been exposed to, or witnessed death, and has himself of herself remained alive. The symptoms affected not only survivors, but their families as well. The symptoms included an inability to work, and even at times to talk. The Jewish people fear that it may happen again. Also a fear of uniformed police officers because of their position of power became very common. There were also many feelings of guilt for having survived when others had not. "Why am I alive?" Why not my sister and brother...my whole family?" The survivors had thoughts of death, nightmares, panic attacks, and various other symptoms. Disinterest in life, people, and sometimes even in reality played a huge role in marital problems and suicide. There are five main categories of Survivor syndrome. The first is the Death imprint, which is the idea of not only death itself, but of all forms of torture and gruesome images of death. For many survivors they can re... Free Essays on Holocaust The Holocaust is a history of overwhelming horror and enduring sorrow. I can’t even imagine having to go through something as tragic as the Holocaust. However, at times I have wondered what it would be like if I were a Jewish girl, living during the Holocaust, and sent to a camp. What would I have done? I have thought that maybe I would just kill myself. What’s the point on trying to live? How would I be able to handle seeing people disappear day by day and watching everyone fall apart? It would be impossible and to live each day in fear that I may be next, I would just die from being so scared. However, I also think I would want to try and live through each day, just to show the Nazi’s that they couldn’t ruin me. I would want to show them I was strong, even if I were weak. I wouldn’t want to let them get the best of me. Yet, honestly I don’t know how I would react. I would have to be faced with the situation to know. â€Å"If w e ask today, sometimes with a faint if se! lf-righteous air of disapproval, why Jews in the camps or ghetto’s behaved the way they did, the answer, more often than not, lies locked in the heart bursting with fear or dread. It is an answer beyond judgment – but not beyond compassion†(Langer 36-37). After reading works of literature by survivors, I was in shock by the way some Jews acted towards one another and even more, betrayed there fellow Jews. They behaved in such a way in which, I would hope if I were in their situation, I would not do what they did. The novel, Survival in Auschwitz by Primo Levi and the short story â€Å"The Block of Death† by Sarah Nomberg-Przytyk, are two works of literature that portray how the Jews behaved. In the novel, Survival in Auschwitz, Primo Levi tells us, in vivid detail, his life while he was in the camp. Levi was a young Italian chemist, only twenty-four, when he was captured by the Fascist militia in 1943. From that day, he no longer had a... Free Essays on Holocaust Analysis of the Holocaust Of all the examples of injustice against humanity in history, the Jewish Holocaust has to be one of the most prominent. In the period of 1933 to 1945, the Nazis waged a vicious war against Jews and other "lesser races". This war came to a head with the "Final Solution" in 1938. One of the end results of the Final Solution was the horrible concentration and death camps of Germany, Poland, and other parts of Nazi-controlled Europe. In the aftermath of the Holocaust, people around the world were shocked by final tallies of human losses, and the people responsible were punished for their inhuman acts. The Holocaust was a dark time in the history of the 20th century. One can trace the beginnings of the Holocaust as far back as 1933, when the Nazi party of Germany, lead by Adolf Hitler, came to power. Hitler's anti-Jew campaign began soon afterward, with the "Nuremberg Laws", which defined the meaning of being Jewish based on ancestry. These laws also forced segregation between Jews and the rest of the public. It was only a dim indication of what the future held for European Jews. Anti-Jewish aggression continued for years after the passing of the Nuremberg Laws. One of these was the "Aryanization" of Jewish property and business. Jews were progressively forced out of the economy of Germany, their assets turned over to the government and the German public. Other forms of degradation were pogroms, or organized demonstrations against Jews. The first, and most infamous, of these pogroms was Krystallnacht, or "The night of broken glass". This pogrom was prompted by the assassination of Ernst von Rath, a German diplomat, by Herschel Grymozpan in Paris on November 7th, 1938. Two days later, an act of retaliation was organized by Joseph Gobbels to attack Jews in Germany. On the nights of November 9th and 10th, over 7,000 Jewish businesses were destroye... Free Essays on Holocaust The Holocaust during World War II was arguably one of the worst human induced disasters that have happened to the human race. The Holocaust orchestrated by the Nazi Empire destroyed millions of lives and created questions about humanity that may never be answered. Many psychological effects caused by the Holocaust forever changed the way the Jewish people view the world and themselves. The Jewish people have been scarred for generations and may never be able to once again associate with the rest of the free world. Further, these scars have now become the looking glass through which the survivors and their children view the world. Through narrow eyes, the survivors relate everything to the experiences they endured during the Holocaust. Likewise, these new views on the world shapes how the survivors live, interact, and raise a family both socially and spiritually. Some survivors are scarred so deeply they cannot escape the past feelings and images of terror; psychologists call this â €Å"Survivor Syndrome†. A survivor of the war is one who has encountered, been exposed to, or witnessed death, and has himself of herself remained alive. The symptoms affected not only survivors, but their families as well. These symptoms were also caused by some of the horrifying experiences that happened especially to the Jewish women. The symptoms included an inability to work, and even at times to talk. The Jewish people fear that it may happen again. Also a fear of uniformed police officers because of their position of power became very common. There were also many feelings of guilt for having survived when others had not. "Why am I alive?" â€Å"Why not my sister and brother...my whole family?" The Jewish holocaust survivors posed those and other questions. The survivors had thoughts of death, nightmares, panic attacks, and various other symptoms. Disinterest in life, people, and sometimes even in reality played a huge role in marital problems and suicid... Free Essays on Holocaust Holocaust By:Robert Perez Holocaust, originally, a religious rite in which an offering was entirely consumed by fire. In current usage, holocaust refers to any widespread human disaster, but as the term Holocaust it means the almost complete destruction of European Jews by Nazi Germany When the Nazi regime came to power in Germany in 1933, it immediately began to take systematic measures against Jews. The Nazi Party, government agencies, banks, and business enterprises made concerted efforts to eliminate Jews from economic life, and from German life in general. In 1938, following the assassination of a German diplomat in Paris by a young Jew, all synagogues in Germany were set on fire, windows of Jewish shops were smashed, and thousands of Jews were arrested. This "Night of Broken When World War II began in 1939, the German army occupied the western half of Poland, bringing almost 2 million more Jews under Germany's control. Polish Jews were forced to move into ghettos surrounded by walls and barbed wi! re. Unemployment, malnutrition, and poverty were widespread; housing was overcrowded; and typhus was common. In June 1941 German armies invaded the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), and soldiers in special units were dispatched to kill all Soviet Jews on the spot. A month after operations began in the USSR, Hermann Gà ¶ring, the second in command of Nazi Germany, sent a directive to Reinhard Heydrich, chief of the Reich Security Main Office, charging him with the task of organizing a "final solution to the Jewish question" in all of German-dominated Europe. Jews in Germany were then forced to wear badges or armbands marked with a yellow star. Soon the Nazis deported tens of thousands to ghettos in Poland and to occupied Soviet cities. Death camps, or concentration camps, equipped with gas chambers were erected in occupied Poland. People were deported from the ghettos; although their destinations were not disclosed, repo... Free Essays on Holocaust THE HOLOCAUST The Holocaust was the destruction of European Jewry by the Nazis through an officially sanctioned, government-ordered, systematic plan of mass annihilation. As many as six million Jews died, almost two-thirds of the Jews of Europe. Although the Holocaust took place during World War II, the war was not the cause of the Holocaust. The war played a role in covering up the genocide of the Jewish people. In 19th century Europe, Jews were classified as an inferior race with specific physical and personality characteristics. Some thinkers believed these traits would disappear if Jews received political and social understanding and could blend into the broader society. Others felt that these traits were genetically passed on and could not be changed. An increasing emphasis on nationalism also highlighted the Jews as a "foreign element," which could contaminate the native stock and culture and potentially dominate the native population economically and politically. This long-standing history provided a reason for the Nazi ideology and program of genocide. Adolph Hitler, who was a charismatic Austrian, rose to power in Germany during the 1920s and early 1930s at a time of social, political, and economic rise. Failing to take power by force in 1923, he eventually won power by democratic means. Once in power, he eliminated all opposition and launched an ambitious program of world domination and elimination of the Jews, the same ideas as he write in his book. The Nazis, under cover of the war, developed the technology, and psychology of hate to murder millions of Jews. The details of the Final Solution were worked out at the Wannsee Conference. All Jews in Germany and the occupied countries were deported to sealed ghettos as a holding area. Many were then shipped in cattle cars to labor camps where they lived under brutally inhuman conditions. Hundreds of thousands were sent directly to the gas chambers in death camps. As th... Free Essays on Holocaust The Holocaust is a term that is synonymous with genocide, the complete destruction of a sect of people, predominantly Jews in this case, simply for the purpose of ethnic cleansing. This was a dark period in the history of the world that tested the strength, spirit, and solidarity of a people. The Holocaust was marked by extreme physical violence, but it may have been the psychological torture endured by both survivors and victims of this horrific event that best signifies the impact it had on the Jewish community and the world. A devastating event that shattered a nation. There are many different questions concerning the Holocaust that have arisen overtime. Debates have raged for decades arguing the intricacies of this single event. People have doubted, and continue to doubt, that there ever was a Holocaust. Scholars can not agree on when the Holocaust began, how long it lasted, or geographically where it occurred. Other questions that regularly appear include to what extent, if any, the Jews put up a resistance when faced with the impending force of Hitler and the Nazi regime. This paper will document facts that affirm the existence of the Holocaust, beginning with the birth and origins surrounding it. A look at concentration camps and their effects will follow, and concluding with a discussion on how the Holocaust has affected the Jewish community today. The Holocaust began when Adolf Hitler came into power and implemented a plan to annihilate the Jewish population in an effort to, in his eyes, purify the German race and solidify the country. Hitler’s rise to power, and growing hatred for the Jewish community, was fueled by apathetic Germans in Berlin during World War I. On October 7, 1916 Hitler received a leg wound and was dismissed from the military temporarily in order to recover. While recuperating in Berlin, he witnesses first hand the lack of support the Germans had for their country fighting in World War I... Free Essays on Holocaust When I was first given this assignment, I would have to say that I have never been more uninterested in doing homework in my life. I’ve never been interested in history of any kind, which would explain my failures to participate in class and so when I first stepped into the Museum of Tolerance I didn’t expect it to make me want to learn and I certainly did not expect one museum visit to change my whole perspective on what human life used to be. But it has in a way I never could have imagined. At the Museum of Tolerance, the first thing I saw was a mini-video that had clips of an interview with William Pierce who wrote â€Å"The Turner Diaries,† which was found in Timothy McVeigh’s possession when he was arrested. The video also had clips of groups of African-American men making stereotypical remarks toward the white-Americans. They spoke of how for every black man who didn’t have a gun, there was a white man with at least one gun. This is obviously a stereotype because not every white man owned a gun. The leader of the group, whose name I did not catch, had even said that he â€Å"wished they would show movies with white men being killed to the point where the blood flowed into the popcorn.† This particular clip had a huge effect on me. I’ve heard of African-Americans being oppressed by the white-Americans since they created slave codes of the pre-civil war era that were later replaced by segregation laws and practices to discriminate a gainst the blacks. But I never realized that the African-Americans of today still feel now, the way the African-Americans of that time felt towards the white-Americans. Then I went into an area that was called â€Å"The Point of View Diner.† It was a video clip of this scenario: There’s a radio disc jockey named Bostic who has a radio show where he constantly uses hate speech. He wasn’t just speaking discriminately towards minorities, but also towards women. Bostic would say stuff like how... Free Essays on Holocaust Yehuda Bauer defines Jewish resistance in Nazi-occupied Europe as â€Å"any group action consciously taken in opposition to known or surmised laws, actions, or intentions directed against the Jews by the Germans and their supporters.† However, many argue that passive resistance, even when done by a single individual, is inherently considered resistance as well. Through careful examination of various sources, written by Bauer and Yahil, considering the difficult conditions Jewish armed and unarmed resistance was considerably more widespread than has been subsequently assumed. In the Holocaust there were three types of Jewish resistance: the resistance and uprising in the ghettos, revolts in death camps, and Jewish participation in the partisan movement. In many ghettos, the Judenrat leaders taught that survival lay in submission, and the general population accepted that ideology. But nevertheless, their was a Jewish effort, including the effort of the underground, which directed their endeavors in aiming to guarantee the physical survival of the Jewish masses. In addition, they also initiated widespread activity on other spheres such as not showing up for labor.. One form of unarmed resistance was the smuggling of food inside the ghetto. One can take Poland as an example, official German food allocations distributed by the Warsaw Judenrat came to 336 calories daily in 1941. It is unlikely that Warsaw Jews could have survived longer than a few months on such rations. But smuggling produced an average of 1125 calories daily. This determination to survive i n defiance of Nazi authority, is definitely to be considered an act of resistance. A second means of unarmed resistance is evident through education. Although the Nazi’s forbade education it took place clandestinely, where small groups of pupils would meet either in the soup kitchen or in the home of the teacher. There is evidence of educating youths in a large number of places in P...

Workplace Discrimination Prohibited by Title VII Laws

Workplace Discrimination Prohibited by Title VII Laws Title VII is the portion of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which protects an individual from employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Specifically, Title VII prohibits employers from hiring, refusing to hire, firing, or laying off an individual due to those factors. It also makes illegal any attempt to segregate, classify, or limit the opportunities of any employees for reasons related to any of the above. This includes promotion, compensation, job training, or any other aspect of employment. Title VIIs Significance to Working Women With regard to gender, workplace discrimination is illegal. This includes discriminatory practices that are deliberate and intentional, or those that take on a less obvious form such as neutral job policies which disproportionately exclude individuals on the basis of sex and that are not job related. Also illegal are any employment decisions based on stereotypes and assumptions regarding the abilities, traits, or the performance of an individual on the basis of sex. Sexual Harassment and Pregnancy Covered Title VII also offers protection to individuals who encounter sex-based discrimination that takes the form of sexual harassment including direct requests for sexual favors to workplace conditions that create a hostile environment for persons of either gender, including same sex harassment. Pregnancy is also protected. Amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, Title VII prohibits discrimination on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth and related medical conditions. Protection for Working Mothers According to the Georgetown University Law Center: Courts have ruled that Title VII prohibits employer decisions and policies based purely on an employer’s stereotyped impression that motherhood...are incompatible with serious work. Courts have found, for example, that the following conduct violates Title VII: having one policy for hiring men with preschool aged children, and another for hiring women with preschool aged children; failing to promote an employee on the assumption that her childcare duties would keep her from being a reliable manager; providing service credits to employees on disability leave, but not to those on pregnancy-related leave; and requiring men, but not women, to demonstrate disability in order to qualify for childrearing leave. LGBT Individuals Not Covered Although Title VII is wide-ranging and covers many workplace issues faced by women and men, it is important to note that sexual orientation is not covered by Title VII. Thus lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender individuals are not protected by this law if discriminatory practices by an employer occur that are related to perceived sexual preferences. Compliance Requirements Title VII applies to any employer with 15 or more employees in both the public and private sector including federal, state and local governments, employment agencies, labor unions, and training programs.

Was Realism a social movement as much as an artistic one Were the Essay

Was Realism a social movement as much as an artistic one Were the artists' messages and calls for changes of attitude more critical than the art itself Please use specific art examples - Essay Example The realists’ messages and calls were critical as they were equally portrayed in their arts. In the artwork of Gustave Courbet in 1856 entitled â€Å"Les Demoiselles du bord de la Seine† for instance, he painted two women resting under a tree. The color of the painting is prominently green which are contrasted by the red and white clothes of the women, usually common in Courbet’s era. The heavy lines of the painting give a smooth texture to the painting, giving it an almost photographic appearance that makes a viewer feel like he is looking at the scene himself and not just a painting. The balance of color and space in the painting does not only present what the painter wants to show but it also makes the artwork appealing to the eyes. As to form and shape, the painter was able to capture how the models would have looked like in real life, being true to their proportions without exaggerating features for emphasis. The painting also shows good spacing between the figures so that even though the plane used is two-dimensional, it shows a three-dimensional picture with the sleeping woman nearer the viewer and the second woman a little farther from the first. The trees also seem to be a distance away from the women, creating a realistic picture which is the message of

LEADERSHIP STRATEGIES Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

LEADERSHIP STRATEGIES - Coursework Example During the process new leaders are made for the future through proper training and experience. Any organization that is in its finest today whether it be, Apple co, Microsoft, Zara was the result of one or more individuals in their early thirties who possessed leadership qualities. While it is true that for a company to be created and be successful it needs to have something to sell, at the same time they need a great leader. A fine example is the late Steve Jobs who did not create any of the Apple computers but steered them into the right direction with his social intelligence and his eye for design. Change management however, is needed in any and every company that wants success in the long run. It simply might be needed because the customers are bored of the monotonous product that they’re being offered or a more complex reason might be because intrapreneurship is needed in the organization because the previous management system wasn’t effective enough. Sometimes the change might be needed because the competitors have caught up and you no longer hold a competitive advantage. Having discussed leadership and change management, it is true that an organization cannot survive without either one of them. Any organization that comes into being is very informal in the beginning, starting off with very few employees, mostly friends who share the same ideas and visions, working in a small office consisting of a mere two or three rooms. Some of these organizations even start off from the garage of a home. The environment of these organizations is very informal which works in the beginning as they only need enough revenue above breakeven to invest further into the workings of the company. When this organization has matured and has enough employees to push out of a city or district it needs to change from an informal management to a more formal one. This is achieved by hiring leaders or identifying leaders among

Hell Is Other People Essay Example for Free

Hell Is Other People Essay He then shouts that they should have at least allowed him his â€Å"damn toothbrush! † The valet is further amused by this outburst, pointing out that every single â€Å"guest† inquires about the torture chamber, and then once they’ve gotten over the initial shock, they start asking for their toothbrushes and what-not. He assures Garcin that he’ll have no need for his toothbrush here, nor sleep, and advises him to forego his â€Å"sense of human dignity†. While trying to come to terms with his situation, Garcin is disturbed by the valet’s lidless eyes and parallels his perpetual sight to his own perpetual consciousness. So that’s the idea, I am to live without eyelids†¦. No eyelids, no sleep; it follows, doesn’t it? I shall never sleep again. But then how shall I endure my own company? † (After rereading the play for a second time, this seems the most ironic bit because Garcin is Liedtke 2 unaware at this point that this room IS his torture chamber, and the other occupants are his torturers, and there will be no escaping them; not even in sleep. ) When left alone, Garcin quickly grows impatient and begins repeatedly ringing the bell which is supposedly meant to summon the valet. However, it doesn’t seem to be orking so he gives up. The door then opens and the valet is accompanied this time by a woman named Inez. She observes Garcin and is silent when the valet asks if she has any questions. When he exits, she immediately demands from Garcin the whereabouts of someone named Florence, but he has no idea what she’s talking about. Inez assumes Garcin is her torturer and when he asks why she thinks that, she replies that torturers often look frightened. He laughs at this, for who have torturers to be frightened of? Inez replies, â€Å"Laugh away, but I know what I’m talking about. I’ve often watched my own face in the glass. † Garcin perceives her hostility but attempts to get along with Inez. He says it’s obvious she doesn’t want him near her and that’s good because he himself would rather be alone anyways. â€Å"To think things through, you know; to set my life in order, and one does that better by oneself. †

ip addressing :: essays research papers

Repeater: operates at physical layers of osi model. Digital signals or analog signals that carry digital data can only be transmitted over a limited distance. After a certain distance attenuation or noise endangers the integrity of that data. Repeaters reproduce and transmit the received digital data. This new signal is the exact duplicate of the original signals. Repeaters offer simple means to extend a network, increased traffic on the network is introduced. This increased network congestion may not be acceptable in some situations.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Switch: Communication networks may be categorized by the architecture and techniques they use to transfer data. The following types of networks are in common. Broadcast communication networks. Local area networks. Packet radio networks. Satellite networks.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  In broadcast communication networks, there are no intermediate switching nodes. Each node in the network is attached to share communication medium. Ethernet and Arc net are examples of broadcast communication networks.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Switched communication networks:   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Circuit switched networks   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Message switched networks.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Packet switched networks. In switched communication network networks there may be multiple paths linking sender and receiver. Data is transmitted from source to destination by being routed through the networks nodes. This is called switching.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Bridges: are limited to extend the network distance up to the network limitations. Bridges are useful to extend the network when dealing with one network. Also bridges limit entire company to use one network. At last when using bridges a failure in the network affects the entire network and thus the entire company.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Routers: can extend the network beyond the limitations of a network by connecting two or more networks. Routers allow extending the network by dealing with many networks. Routers also allow you to use a backbone network for faster transfer of information across the different networks.

Poetics by Aristotle Essay

Aristotle’s most famous contribution to logic is the syllogism, which he discusses primarily in the Prior Analytics. A syllogism is a three-step argument containing three different terms. A simple example is â€Å"All men are mortal; Socrates is a man; therefore, Socrates is mortal. † This three-step argument contains three assertions consisting of the three terms Socrates,man, and mortal. The first two assertions are called premises and the last assertion is called the conclusion; in a logically valid syllogism, such as the one just presented, the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises. That is, if you know that both of the premises are true, you know that the conclusion must also be true. Aristotle uses the following terminology to label the different parts of the syllogism: the premise whose subject features in the conclusion is called theminor premise and the premise whose predicate features in the conclusion is called the major premise. In the example, â€Å"All men are mortal† is the major premise, and since mortal is also the predicate of the conclusion, it is called the major term. Socrates† is called the minor term because it is the subject of both the minor premise and the conclusion, and man, which features in both premises but not in the conclusion, is called the middle term. In analyzing the syllogism, Aristotle registers the important distinction between particulars and universals. Socrates is a particular term, meaning that the word Socrates names a particular person. By contrast, man andmortal are universal terms, meaning that they name general categories or qualities that might be true of many particulars. Socrates is one of billions of particular terms that falls under the universal man. Universals can be either the subject or the predicate of a sentence, whereas particulars can only be subjects. Aristotle identifies four kinds of â€Å"categorical sentences† that can be constructed from sentences that have universals for their subjects. When universals are subjects, they must be preceded by every, some, or no. To return to the example of a syllogism, the first of the three terms was not just â€Å"men are mortal,† but rather â€Å"all men are mortal. † The contrary of â€Å"all men are mortal† is â€Å"some men are not mortal,† because one and only one of these claims is true: they cannot both  be true or both be false. Similarly, the contrary of â€Å"no men are mortal† is â€Å"some men are mortal. † Aristotle identifies sentences of these four forms—â€Å"All X is Y,† â€Å"Some X is not Y,† â€Å"No X is Y,† and â€Å"Some X is Y†Ã¢â‚¬â€as the four categorical sentences and claims that all assertions can be analyzed into categorical sentences. That means that all assertions we make can be reinterpreted as categorical sentences and so can be fit into syllogisms. If all our assertions can be read as premises or conclusions to various syllogisms, it follows that the syllogism is the framework of all reasoning. Any valid argument must take the form of a syllogism, so Aristotle’s work in analyzing syllogisms provides a basis for analyzing all arguments. Aristotle analyzes all forty-eight possible kinds of syllogisms that can be constructed from categorical sentences and shows that fourteen of them are valid. In On Interpretation,Aristotle extends his analysis of the syllogism to examine modal logic, that is, sentences containing the words possibly ornecessarily. He is not as successful in his analysis, but the analysis does bring to light at least one important problem. It would seem that all past events necessarily either happened or did not happen, meaning that there are no events in the past that possibly happened and possibly did not happen. By contrast, we tend to think of many future events as possible and not necessary. But if someone had made a prediction yesterday about what would happen tomorrow, that prediction, because it is in the past, must already be necessarily true or necessarily false, meaning that what will happen tomorrow is already fixed by necessity and not just possibility. Aristotle’s answer to this problem is unclear, but he seems to reject the fatalist idea that the future is already fixed, suggesting instead that statements about the future cannot be either true or false. Organon: The Structure of Knowledge Summary The Categories, traditionally interpreted as an introduction to Aristotle’s logical work, divides all of being into ten categories. These ten categories are as follows: Substance, which in this context means what something is essentially (e. g. , human, rock) * Quantity (e. g. , ten feet, five liters) * Quality (e.g. , blue, obvious). * Relation (e. g. , double, to the right of) * Location (e. g. , New York, home plate) * Time (e. g. , yesterday, four o’clock) * Position (e. g. , sitting, standing) * Possession (e. g. , wearing shoes, has a blue coat) * Doing (e. g. , running, smiling) * Undergoing (e. g. , being run into, being smiled at) Of the ten, Aristotle considers substance to be primary, because we can conceive of a substance without, for example, any given qualities but we cannot conceive of a quality except as it pertains to a particular substance. One important conclusion from this division into categories is that we can make no general statements about being as a whole because there are ten very different ways in which something can have being. There is no common ground between the kind of being that a rock has and the kind of being that the color blue has. Aristotle’s emphasis on the syllogism leads him to conceive of knowledge as hierarchically structured, a claim that he fleshes out in the Posterior Analytics. To have knowledge of a fact, it is not enough simply to be able to repeat the fact. We must also be able to give the reasons why that fact is true, a process that Aristotle calls demonstration. Demonstration is essentially a matter of showing that the fact in question is the conclusion to a valid syllogism. If some truths are premises that can be used to prove other truths, those first truths are logically prior to the truths that follow from them. Ultimately, there must be one or several â€Å"first principles,† from which all other truths follow and which do not themselves follow from anything. However, if these first principles do not follow from anything, they cannot count as knowledge because there are no reasons or premises we can give to prove that they are true. Aristotle suggests that these first principles are a kind of intuition of the universals we recognize in experience. Aristotle believes that the objects of knowledge are also structured hierarchically and conceives of definition as largely a process of division. For example, suppose we want to define human. First, we note that humans are animals, which is the genus to which they belong. We can then take note of various differentia, which distinguish humans from other animals. For example, humans walk on two legs, unlike tigers, and they lack feathers, unlike birds. Given any term, if we can identify its genus and then identify the differentia that distinguish it from other things within its genus, we have given a definition of that term, which amounts to giving an account of its nature, or essence. Ultimately, Aristotle identifies five kinds of relationships a predicate can have with its subject: a genus relationship (â€Å"humans are animals†); a differentia relationship (â€Å"humans have two legs†); a unique property relationship (â€Å"humans are the only animals that can cry†); a definition, which is a unique property that explains the nature or essence of the subject; and an accident relationship, such as â€Å"some humans have blue eyes,† where the relationship does not hold necessarily. While true knowledge is all descended from knowledge of first principles, actual argument and debate is much less pristine. When two people argue, they need not go back to first principles to ground every claim but must simply find premises they both agree on. The trick to debate is to find premises your opponent will agree to and then show that conclusions contrary to your opponent’s position follow necessarily from these premises. The Topicsdevotes a great deal of attention to classifying the kinds of conclusions that can be drawn from different kinds of premises, whereas the Sophistical Refutations explores various logical tricks used to deceive people into accepting a faulty line of reasoning. Physics: Books 1-4. The Physics opens with an investigation into the principles of nature. At root, there must be a certain number of basic principles at work in nature, according to which all natural processes can be explained. All change or process involves something coming to be from out of its opposite. Something comes to be what it is by acquiring its distinctive form—for example, a baby becomes an adult, a seed becomes a mature plant, and so on. Since this the baby or the seed were working toward this form all along, the form itself (the idea or pattern of the mature specimen) must have existed before the baby or seed actually matured. Thus, the form must be one of the principles of nature. Another principle of nature must be the privation or absence of this form, the opposite out of which the form came into being. Besides form and privation, there must be a third principle, matter, which remains constant throughout the process of change. If nothing remains unchanged when something undergoes a change, then there would be no â€Å"thing† that we could say underwent the change. So there are three basic principles of nature: matter, form, and privation. For example, a person’s education involves the form of being educated, the privation of being ignorant, and the underlying matter of the person who makes the change from ignorance to education. This view of the principles of nature resolves many of the problems of earlier philosophers and suggests that matter is conserved: though its form may change, the underlying matter involved in changes remains constant. Change takes place according to four different kinds of cause. These causes are closer to what we might call â€Å"explanations†: they explain in different ways why the change came to pass. The four causes are (1) material cause, which explains what something is made of; (2) formal cause, which explains the form or pattern to which a thing corresponds; (3) efficient cause, which is what we ordinarily mean by â€Å"cause,† the original source of the change; and (4) final cause, which is the intended purpose of the change. For example, in the making of a house, the material cause is the materials the house is made of, the formal cause is the architect’s plan, the efficient cause is the process of building it, and the final cause is to provide shelter and comfort. Natural objects, such as plants and animals, differ from artificial objects in that they have an internal source of change. All the causes of change in artificial objects are found outside the objects themselves, but natural objects can cause change from within. Aristotle rejects the idea that chance constitutes a fifth cause, similar in nature to the other four. We normally talk about chance in reference to coincidences, where two separate events, which had their own causes, coincide in a way that is not explained by either set of causes. For instance, two people might both have their own reasons for being in a certain place at a certain time, but neither of these sets of reasons explains the coincidence of both people being there at the same time. Final causes apply to nature as much as to art, so everything in nature serves a useful purpose. Aristotle argues against the views both of Democritus, who thinks that necessity in nature has no useful purpose, and of Empedocles, who holds an evolutionary view according to which only those combinations of living parts that are useful have managed to survive and reproduce themselves. If Democritus were right, there would be as many useless aspects of nature as there are useful, while Empedocles’ theory does not explain how random combinations of parts could come together in the first place. Books III and IV examine some fundamental concepts of nature, starting with change, and then treating infinity, place, void, and time. Aristotle defines change as â€Å"the actuality of that which exists potentially, in so far as it is potentially this actuality. † That is, change rests in the potential of one thing to become another. In all cases, change comes to pass through contact between an agent and a patient, where the agent imparts its form to the patient and the change itself takes place in the patient. Either affirming or denying the existence of infinity leads to certain contradictions and paradoxes, and Aristotle finds an ingenious solution by distinguishing between potential and actual infinities. He argues that there is no such thing as an actual infinity: infinity is not a substance in its own right, and there are neither infinitely large objects nor an infinite number of objects. However, there are potential infinities in the sense that, for example, an immortal could theoretically sit down and count up to an infinitely large number but that this is impossible in practice. Time, for example, is a potential infinity because it potentially extends forever, but no one who is counting time will ever count an infinite number of minutes or days. Aristotle asserts that place has a being independent of the objects that occupy it and denies the existence of empty space, or void. Place must be independent of objects because otherwise it would make no sense to say that different objects can be in the same place at different times. Aristotle defines place as the limits of what contains an object and determines that the place of the earth is â€Å"at the center† and the place of the heavens as â€Å"at the periphery. † Aristotle’s arguments against the void make a number of fundamental errors. For example, he assumes that heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones. From this assumption, he argues that the speed of a falling object is directly proportional to an object’s weight and inversely proportional to the density of the medium it travels through. Since the void is a medium of zero density, that would mean that an object would fall infinitely fast through a void, which is an absurdity, so Aristotle concludes that there cannot be such a thing as a void. Aristotle closely identifies time with change. We register that time has passed only by registering that something has changed. In other words, time is a measure of change just as space is a measure of distance. Just as Aristotle denies the possibility of empty space, or void, Aristotle denies the possibility of empty time, as in time that passes without anything happening. Physics: Books 5-8 Summary There are three kinds of change: generation, where something comes into being; destruction, where something is destroyed; and variation, where some attribute of a thing is changed while the thing itself remains constant. Of the ten categories Aristotle describes in the Categories (see previous summary of the Organon), change can take place only in respect of quality, quantity, or location. Change itself is not a substance and so it cannot itself have any properties. Among other things, this means that changes themselves cannot change. Aristotle discusses the ways in which two changes may be the same or different and argues also that no two changes are opposites, but rather that rest is the opposite of change. Time, space, and movement are all continuous, and there are no fundamental units beyond which they cannot be divided. Aristotle reasons that movement must be continuous because the alternative—that objects make infinitesimally small jumps from one place to another without occupying the intermediate space—is absurd and counterintuitive. If an object moves from point A to point B, there must be a time at which it is moving from point A to point B. If it is simply at point A at one instant and point B at the next, it cannot properly be said to have moved from the one to the other. If movement is continuous, then time and space must also be continuous, because continuous movement would not be possible if time and space consisted of discrete, indivisible atoms. Among the connected discussions of change, rest, and continuity, Aristotle considers Zeno’s four famous paradoxes. The first is the dichotomy paradox: to get to any point, we must first travel halfway, and to get to that halfway point, we must travel half of that halfway, and to get to half of that halfway, we must first travel a half of the half of that halfway, and so on infinitely, so that, for any given distance, there is always a smaller distance to be covered first, and so we can never start moving at all. Aristotle answers that time can be divided just as infinitely as space, so that it would take infinitely little time to cover the infinitely little space needed to get started. The second paradox is called the Achilles paradox: supposing Achilles is racing a tortoise and gives the tortoise a head start. Then by the time Achilles reaches the point the tortoise started from, the tortoise will have advanced a certain distance, and by the point Achilles advances that certain distance, the tortoise will have advanced a bit farther, and so on, so that it seems Achilles will never be able to catch up with, let alone pass, the tortoise. Aristotle responds that the paradox assumes the existence of an actual infinity of points between Achilles and the tortoise. If there were an actual infinity—that is, if Achilles had to take account of all the infinite points he passed in catching up with the tortoise—it would indeed take an infinite amount of time for Achilles to pass the tortoise. However, there is only a potential infinity of points between Achilles and the tortoise, meaning that Achilles can cover the infinitely many points between him and the tortoise in a finite amount of time so long as he does not take account of each point along the way. The third and fourth paradoxes, called the arrow paradox and the stadium paradox, respectively, are more obscure, but they seem to aim at proving that time and space cannot be divided into atoms. This is a position that Aristotle already agrees with, so he takes less trouble over these paradoxes. Aristotle argues that change is eternal because there cannot be a first cause of change without assuming that that cause was itself uncaused. Living things can cause change without something external acting on them, but the source of this change is internal thoughts and desires, and these thoughts and desires are provoked by external stimuli. Arguing that time is infinite, Aristotle reasons that there cannot be a last cause, since time cannot exist without change. Next, Aristotle argues that everything that changes is changed by something external to itself. Even changes within a single animal consist of one part of the animal changing another part. Aristotle’s reflections on cause and change lead him ultimately to posit the existence of a divine unmoved mover. If we were to follow a series of causes to its source, we would find a first cause that is either an unchanged changer or a self-changing changer. Animals are the best examples of self-changers, but they constantly come into being and pass away. If there is an eternal succession of causes, there needs to be a first cause that is also eternal, so it cannot be a self-changing animal. Since change is eternal, there must be a single cause of change that is itself eternal and continuous. The primary kind of change is movement and the primary kind of movement is circular, so this first cause must cause circular movement. This circular movement is the movement of the heavens, and it is caused by some first cause of infinite power that is above the material world. The circular movement of the heavens is then in turn the cause of all other change in the sublunary world. Metaphysics: Books Alpha-Epsilon Knowledge consists of particular truths that we learn through experience and the general truths of art and science. Wisdom consists in understanding the most general truths of all, which are the fundamental principles and causes that govern everything. Philosophy provides the deepest understanding of the world and of divinity by pursuing the sense of wonder we feel toward reality. There are four kinds of cause, or rather kinds of explanation, for how things are: (1) the material cause, which explains what a thing is made of; (2) the formal cause, which explains the form a thing assumes; (3) the efficient cause, which explains the process by which it came into being; and (4) the final cause, which explains the end or purpose it serves. The explanations of earlier philosophers have conformed to these four causes but not as coherently and systematically as Aristotle’s formulation. Aristotle acknowledges that Plato’s Theory of Forms gives a strong account of the formal cause, but it fails to prove that Forms exist and to explain how objects in the physical world participate in Forms. Book Alpha the Lesser addresses some questions of method. Though we all have a natural aptitude for thinking philosophically, it is very difficult to philosophize well. The particular method of study depends on the subject being studied and the inclinations of the students. The important thing is to have a firm grasp of method before proceeding, whatever the method. The best method is that of mathematics, but this method is not suitable for subjects where the objects of study are prone to change, as in science. Most reasoning involves causal chains, where we investigate a phenomenon by studying its causes, and then the cause of those causes, and so on. This method would be unworkable if there were infinitely long causal chains, but all causal chains are finite, meaning that there must be an uncaused first cause to every chain. Book Beta consists of a series of fifteen metaphysical puzzles on the nature of first principles, substance, and other fundamental concepts. In each case, Aristotle presents a thesis and a contradicting antithesis, both of which could be taken as answers to the puzzle. Aristotle himself provides no answers to the puzzles but rather takes them as examples of extreme positions between which he will try to mediate throughout the rest of the Metaphysics. Book Gamma asserts that philosophy, especially metaphysics, is the study of being qua being. That is, while other sciences investigate limited aspects of being, metaphysics investigates being itself. The study of being qua being amounts to the search into first principles and causes. Being itself is primarily identified with the idea of substance, but also with unity, plurality, and a variety of other concepts. Philosophy is also concerned with logic and the principles of demonstration, which are supremely general, and hence concerned with being itself. The most fundamental principle is the principle of noncontradiction: nothing can both be something and not be that same something. Aristotle defends this principle by arguing that it is impossible to contradict it coherently. Connected to the principle of non-contradiction is the principle of the excluded middle, which states that there is no middle position between two contradictory positions. That is, a thing is either x or not-x, and there is no third possibility. Book Gamma concludes with an attack on several general claims of earlier philosophers: that everything is true, that everything is false, that everything is at rest, and that everything is in motion. Book Delta consists of the definitions of about forty terms, some of which feature prominently in the rest of the Metaphysics, such as principle, cause, nature, being, and substance. The definitions specify precisely how Aristotle uses these terms and often distinguish between different uses or categories of the terms. Book Epsilon opens by distinguishing philosophy from the sciences not just on the basis of its generality but also because philosophy, unlike the sciences, takes itself as a subject of inquiry. The sciences can be divided into practical, productive, and theoretical. The theoretical sciences can be divided further into physics, mathematics, and theology, or first philosophy, which studies first principles and causes. We can look at being in four different ways: accidental being, being as truth, the category of being, and being in actuality and potentiality. Aristotle considers the first two in book Epsilon and examines the category of being, or substance, in books Zeta and Eta, and being in actuality and potentiality in book Theta. Accidental being covers the kinds of properties that are not essential to a thing described. For example, if a man is musical, his musicality is accidental since being musical does not define him as a man and he would still be a man even if he were not musical. Accidental being must have a kind of accidental causation, which we might associate with chance. That is, there is no necessary reason why a musical man is musical, but rather it just so happens by chance that he is musical. Being as truth covers judgments that a given proposition is true. These sorts of judgments involve mental acts, so being as truth is an affection of the mind and not a kind of being in the world. Because accidental being is random and being as truth is only mental, they fall outside the realm of philosophy, which deals with more fundamental kinds of being. Metaphysics: Books Zeta-Eta Summary Referring back to his logical work in the Categories, Aristotle opens book Zeta by asserting that substance is the primary category of being. Instead of considering what being is, we can consider what substance is. Aristotle first rejects the idea that substance is the ultimate substrate of a thing, that which remains when all its accidental properties are stripped away. For example, a dog is more fundamental than the color brown or the property of hairiness that are associated with it. However, if we strip away all the properties that a dog possesses, we wind up with a substrate with no properties of its own. Since this substrate has no properties, we can say nothing about it, so this substrate cannot be substance. Instead, Aristotle suggests that we consider substance as essence and concludes that substances are species. The essence of a thing is that which makes it that thing. For example, being rational is an essential property of being human, because a human without rationality ceases to be human, but being musical is not an essential property of being human, because a human without musical skill is still human. Individual people, or dogs, or tables, contain a mixture of essential and inessential properties. Species, on the other hand—for instance, people in general, dogs in general, or tables in general—contain only essential properties. A substance can be given a definition that does not presuppose the existence of anything else. A snub, for example, is not a substance, because we would define a snub as â€Å"a concave nose,† so our definition of snub presupposes the existence of noses. A proper definition of a thing will list only its essential properties, and Aristotle asserts that only substances have essential properties or definitions. A snub nose, by contrast, has only accidental properties—properties like redness or largeness that may hold of some snubs but not of all—and per se properties—properties like concavity, which necessarily holds of all snubs but which is not essential. Physical objects are composites of form and matter, and Aristotle identifies substance with form. The matter of an object is the stuff that makes it up, whereas the form is the shape that stuff takes. For example, the matter in a bronze sphere is the bronze itself, and the form is the spherical shape. Aristotle argues that form is primary because form is what gives each thing its distinctive nature. Aristotle has argued that the definitions of substances cannot presuppose the existence of anything else, which raises the question of how there can be a definition that does not presuppose the existence of anything else. Presumably, a definition divides a whole into its constituent parts—for example, a human is defined as a rational animal—which suggests that a substance must in some way presuppose the existence of its constituent parts. Aristotle distinguishes between those cases where the parts of an object or definition are prior to the whole and those cases where the whole is prior to the parts. For example, we cannot understand the parts of a circle without first understanding the concept of circle as a whole; on the other hand, we cannot understand the whole of a syllable before we understand the letters that constitute its parts. Aristotle argues that, in the case of substance, the whole is prior to the parts. He has earlier associated substance with form and suggests that we cannot make sense of matter before we can conceive of its form. To say a substance can be divided by its definition is like saying a physical object can be divided into form and matter: this conceptual distinction is possible, but form and matter constitute an indivisible whole, and neither can exist without the other. Similarly, the parts of a definition of a substance are conceptually distinct, but they can only exist when they are joined in a substance. Having identified substance with essence, Aristotle attacks the view that substances are universals. This attack becomes effectively an attack on Plato’s Theory of Forms, and Aristotle argues forcefully that universal Forms cannot exist prior to the individual instances of them or be properly defined and so cannot play any role in science, let alone a fundamental role. He also argues against the suggestion that substances can be genus categories, like â€Å"animal† or â€Å"plant. † Humans and horses, unlike animals, have the property of â€Å"thisness†: the words human and horse pick out a particular kind of thing, whereas nothing particular is picked out by animal. Genuses are thus not specific enough to qualify as substances. Book Eta contains a number of loosely connected points elaborating Aristotle’s views on substance. Aristotle associates an object’s matter with its potentiality and its form with its actuality. That is, matter is potentially a certain kind of substance and becomes that substance in actuality when it takes on the form of that substance. By associating substance with form and actuality, Aristotle infers a further connection between substance and differentia: differentia are those qualities that distinguish one species in a genus from another. Book Eta also contains reflections on the nature of names, matter, number, and definition. Metaphysics: Books Theta-Nu Summary Book Theta discusses potentiality and actuality, considering these concepts first in regard to process or change. When one thing, F, changes into another, G, we can say that F is G in potentiality, while G is G in actuality. F changes into G only if some other agent, H, acts on it. We say that H has active potentiality and F has passive potentiality. Potentiality can be either rational or irrational, depending on whether the change is effected by a rational agent or happens naturally. Aristotle distinguishes rational potentiality from irrational potentiality, saying that rational potentiality can produce opposites. For example, the rational potentiality of medicine can produce either health or sickness, whereas the irrational potentiality of heating can produce only heat and not cold. All potentialities must eventually be realized: if a potentiality never becomes an actuality, then we do not call it a potentiality but an impossibility. A potentiality is also determinate, meaning that it is the potential for a particular actuality and cannot realize some other actuality. While irrational potentialities are automatically triggered when active and passive potentialities come together, this is not the case with rational potentialities, as a rational agent can choose to withhold the realization of the potentiality even though it can be realized. Aristotle identifies actuality with form, and hence substance, while identifying matter with potentiality. An uncarved piece of wood, for example, is a potential statue, and it becomes an actual statue when it is carved and thus acquires the form of a statue. Action is an actuality, but there are such things as incomplete actions, which are also the potentiality for further actions.

Robespierre – Evil or Virtuous?

Robespierre: Evil or Virtuous? â€Å"Virtue, without which terror is destructive; terror, without which virtue is impotent† (Zizek). Maximilien Robespierre said this in a speech when people were starting to question his judgment. He believed that to be only virtuous was difficult, and without some terror added in, the world would go into turmoil as no one would follow their leader. A leader has to be strong and forceful, and sometimes even terrifying to get their point across, or to get people to follow them.Robespierre always wanted what was best for France and was willing to do anything to get it, even if that meant causing harm to the people of France. He felt that as long as the outcome of his hard work came with the results he wanted, anything he did was justified. Despite all the horror of the Reign of Terror, Maximilien Robespierre was a virtuous man. He not only reacted to the problems in France with determination, but he created a clear program to help France in this troubled time. He also was the leader of many committees and he established many laws to further the French Revolution.Even when some of the people of France started to turn against him, he produced a program to help them, not to harm them. Robespierre always had France’s best interests at heart. He never wanted to have to use terror as a means of moving the French Revolution forwards, but he believed it had to happen for the better of France. He was a virtuous man from the beginning right up until the end and for that, he will be well remembered. In 1788, France was in turmoil and panic. France was going bankrupt and King Louis had to deal with disaster after disaster. The coldest winter in the history of France in seventy-nine years fell upon the nation.The price of bread almost doubled, the peasantry began to starve, and famine threatened whole sections of the population. By the end of 1788, Louis XVI received over eight hundred petitions demanding that the Commons, the Th ird Estate, have as many votes as the clergy and nobility combined in the Estates-General (Blumberg 291). By late November, King Louis became desperate and issued a proclamation convening the Estates-General for the following May, showing that already he was losing power over his people. Robespierre was elected as one of the twenty-four representatives of the Third Estate for Arras.He came in with a calm determination to fix everything and began to make his mark in history. As soon as the summoning of the Estates-General was proclaimed, Robespierre conceived the idea of seeking election. Unlike others who claimed to speak to the whole of France, he thought it better to deal with local matters, thus providing the people with issues of more immediate interest. Robespierre believed that the Estates were not representative since they were â€Å"constituted of a league of a few citizens who had seized power which belongs only to the people† (Matrat 43).He thought that the First Es tate held their seats only by virtue of their rank, and not by election and did not believe that this was fair. â€Å"By what right have they excluded the cures, the class that is without contradiction the most numerous; the most useful of this body; the most valuable because of the close relationship which binds it to the needs and interests of the people† (Matrat 43)? Robespierre went on to consider the composition of the Second Estate and found it no more representative. As for the Third Estate, he stressed that they represented neither the townspeople nor the country folk.Robespierre also protested strongly against forced labour among the farmers of Hainaut, which brought him the favour of these people as well as respect from many others. Robespierre was also in the National Assembly and was trying his hardest to restore the rights of man to his country. During these years, he earned a reputation for integrity and developed eloquence in his speeches that drew increasing a ttention from the Assembly. Robespierre proposed the self-denying law which made all the delegates to the first Assembly of 1789 ineligible for the second in 1791 and he also argued that liberty could not be spread by force.The Royal Family of France’s attempted escape on June 20th, 1791 made many people very unhappy with the King. The mob, ever ready to exercise the uncontrolled Rights of Men, made a mock parade of the King’s Arms in the market places, and, dashing them and the figure of a crown to the ground, they trampled upon them, crying out, â€Å"Since the King has abandoned what he owed to his high situation, let us trample upon the ensigns of royalty† (Ascherson 48)! The Royal Family not only lost many of its followers through their attempted escape, but also because King Louis XVI kept making bad decisions, ones that had no benefit to France or its people.The people wanted someone who would lead them into a revolution and change France for the better, not because they wanted the power, but because they believed in France and wanted it to become a great nation. That man was Robespierre, who after the flight of the King followed the Jacobin club in its move toward republicanism. He called for universal male suffrage and the end of property qualifications for voting and office holding (Blumberg 290). Robespierre wanted to make France a republic, a government for the people and by the people, a country where everyone had the freedoms and rights they deserved.In January of 1793, Robespierre voted on whether or not he thought that King Louis should be executed for his actions. At the Convention on the trial of the King, he looked towards the judges and stated; Because you have established yourselves the judge of Louis, without the usual forms, are you less his judges? You cannot separate your quality of Judge from that of Legislator. These two qualities are indivisible. You have acknowledged the crimes of the tyrant. It is your duty to punish them. No consideration should make you hesitate respecting the punishment reserved for the greatest criminal that ever existed.I vote for the punishment of death (Ascherson 84). Robespierre led the beginning of other members of the Assembly leaders voting for the Kings death. Out of a total of seven hundred and forty-five members, three hundred and sixty-six voted for King Louis death that was carried out on January 25th, 1793 (Ascherson 86-7). After the Kings death, Robespierre stood up as the leader of France and the Jacobins and began his attempts to make France the nation he hoped it would someday become. Robespierre accomplished much, establishing many committees and laws to further the French Revolution.The Declaration of the Rights of Man proclaimed freedom, propriety, the safety of the individual, resistance to oppression, the sovereignty of the nation, the participation of all citizens in the drawing up of laws, and the admission of all to situations and honours, wi th no other distinction than that of their virtues and their talents (Kreis). Robespierre believed in the Declaration and was against the establishment of any censorship. There ought to be no compromise in the matter. The freedom of the press ought to be established without any reservation.Free men cannot set out their rights in equivocal terms. Freedom of the press is the corollary of freedom of speech. In a free state each citizen is a guardian of freedom, who must shout at the smallest rumour, and at the least sight of any danger which threatens it (Matrat 67). Robespierre argued his beliefs and his dreams not only for himself, but for those people who did not have a voice. He argued for the people of France. Through newspapers and word of mouth, Robespierre became known as one of the most diligent defenders of the people.He made many speeches and put forth many proposals in the National Assembly that spoke on the changes he wanted to make in France. One such proposal was to crea te a tribunal made up of members of the Assembly who would be concerned with â€Å"plots and conspiracies against the people and freedom† (Matrat 79). Then the people, certain of the punishment of its enemies, would feel reassured and would calm down. When Robespierre was elected as the president of the Jacobins in March of 1790 he reacted with determination and a clear program.The nation had to mobilize all its resources for the war against Austria, draft every available man, ration food fix prices and wages, weed out opposition at home, punish slackers, speculators, and food hoarders, and suspend due process of law to accelerate the arrests of counterrevolutionaries (Blumberg 291). In April on 1793, the Committee of Public Safety replaced the Committee for General Defence with nine members. The Committee of Public Safety formed to keep chaos from reigning over France as counter-revolutionaries rebelled against the new French government.Soon after the Committee was establish ed, the Convention elected Robespierre to the Committee. Robespierre wanted to rally the masses to Jacobin doctrines and so he set up three laws to give them substantial advantages. One law set up the sale of the possessions of emigres in small lots, with a period of ten years for payment to be made. This made it possible for the less wealthy peasants to buy land (Duhaime). Another law provided for the subdivision of communal property in equal portions and the third law abolished hierarchy rights and dues founded on ancient charters.Finally, to cushion the effect of rising prices there was a general increase in the salaries of civil servants (Matrat 204). As Robespierre’s reign went on more and more people started attacking him, believing that he was working against the Revolution. Robespierre heard the people whispering about him when they thought he was not listening, but he was listening all the time. In a speech, he announced to everybody that he knew people where against them, but he wanted them to say it to his face. One man then spoke up against him and accused him.Robespierre looked at the man calmly and did not criticize him, but thanked him. â€Å"Citizen, you had the courage to accuse me of wanting to be my country’s enemy, in the face of the people’s representatives, in this very place where I defended their rights. I thank you. I recognize in this deed the citizenship that characterizes the famous city that has sent you† (Matrat 175). Robespierre wanted to give the people a chance to speak their mind, but he always defended himself against the crimes that they claimed he did.When being accused of â€Å"having ceaselessly slandered the purest patriots† (Matrat 178), Robespierre came back with a speech that was calm and precise, one that made a strong impression and won him back some of the people of France. While in the Committee of Public Safety, Robespierre continued to prove to the people that he was indeed on their side. He knew that there were some who criticized the committee for its military policy, but also knew that they could only do so with the intention of embarrassing the government.I realize that there is a scheme for paralyzing the Committee of Public Safety, by seeming to help it in its work, and that people are trying to vilify the executive power so that they can say that there is no longer an authority in France capable of holding the reins of government. The fact is that they want our places. Well, let them take them! I would like to see them, night and day, probing the wounds of the state, and spending their lives in finding a remedy for them. Do they want to extenuate out labours, or do they want to lead us to counter-revolution by betraying patriots in the hearts of the people (Matrat 223)?As always, Robespierre had captivated the crowd and won their applause. He proved that the job he was doing was hard, and that if others wanted to take over, they would not be able t oo. They would only lead to the downfall of France. The war against Austria was over in the spring of 1794 and the French armies began to come home. Robespierre continued to murder those he thought were against him and France but the people no longer understood his actions. Up to a certain point the Terror had been justified by reverses in the war, but France was now victorious.Robespierre was being called a tyrant for his murderous ways but he had a different view on the matter. â€Å"They call me tyrant. If I were, they would grovel at my feet, I would gorge them with gold, I would give them the right to commit any crime† (Matrat 267). Even with the people of France turning against him and calling him a tyrant, he continued to do his best to help them. Robespierre set up a program for France that included a guarantee of food for everyone at low prices, distribution of land to the poor, public education, social security for the aged, ill and injured, and a progressive income tax (Blumberg 292).Robespierre was the power and change France needed right up until the very end and no matter what the people did to him, said to him, or thought of him, he kept to his goals for France. Robespierre wanted a revolution, he wanted change and he, without a doubt brought it to France. Of all the Chiefs of the different groups which have successively reigned in the volcano of the French Revolution, Robespierre was the man whose Government promised to be the most durable; because he had the character of being the most incorruptible, and of being the man who had shown the least variation in his conduct (Ascherson 115).Despite all the horror of the Reign of Terror, Maximilien Robespierre was a virtuous man. When France was in turmoil and panic Robespierre came in to fix everything and helped move France forward and push the Revolution onwards. He was a leader in the Committee of Public Safety and created laws all to try and help France. Even when people started to turn o n him, he put forth a program to try and aid them. He cared about the people of France, and even France itself as a whole. Robespierre wanted France to change and develop into the country he knew it would someday be and he was willing to do anything to achieve this goal.

Immigration and Discrimination essays

Immigration and Discrimination essays Since the birth of America, the United States has been a place of hopes and dreams for the downtrodden trapped by poverty, famine, and political instability in their homelands. These masses have historically turned to the United States as a way to make a better life for themselves and their families, but these people have not always found the lives they dreamed of making in the United States. The United States has a rather shameful history of treating its immigrants poorly. Immigrants throughout the history of the United States have been avoided, persecuted, and discriminated against; and yet they have borne these overwhelming burdens because as miserable as their conditions in America have been, they have always been better than those in their homelands. The Chinese immigrants to this country in the mid-nineteenth century had several motivations for leaving their homeland. Some came to the United States to escape the turmoil of the Opium War that had taken over China at the time. This conflict between China and Great Britain exploded when the Chinese government outlawed the importation of opium and ordered the destruction of British opium stored in the city of Canton, at which Great Britain immediately declared war on China(Morrow 29). This conflict, combined with the vast problems of poverty and famine in China caused many of the Chinese to look toward the United States for a solution. Around the same time these events were taking place in China, the California gold rush was picking up momentum in the United States. Only a handful of Chinese were living in the United States when gold was discovered in 1848, but news of the discovery soon reached China. According to one account: ...many saw this as an opportunity to escape the extreme poverty of the time. Many peasant families were forced to sell one of their children, usually a girl, in order to survive. Paying forty dollars cash or signing a contract to repay one hu...

Airport Noise and Pollution Can Effect Your Health

Airport Noise and Pollution Can Effect Your Health Researchers have known for years that exposure to excessively loud noise can cause changes in blood pressure as well as changes in sleep and digestive patterns, all signs of stress on the human body. The very word â€Å"noise† itself derives from the Latin word â€Å"noxia,† which means injury or hurt. Airport Noise and Pollution Increase Risk for Illness On a 1997 questionnaire distributed to two groups (one living near a major airport, and the other in a quiet neighborhood), two-thirds of those living near the airport indicated they were bothered by aircraft noise, and most said that it interfered with their daily activities. The same two-thirds complained more than the other group of sleep difficulties, and also perceived themselves as being in poorer health. Perhaps even more alarming, the European Commission, which governs the European Union (E.U.), considers living near an airport to be a risk factor for coronary heart disease and stroke, as increased blood pressure from noise pollution can trigger these more serious maladies. The E.U. estimates that 20% of Europe’s population (about 80 million people) are exposed to airport noise levels it considers unhealthy and unacceptable. Airport Noise Affects Children Airport noise can also have negative effects on children’s health and development. A 1980 study examining the impact of airport noise on children’s health found higher blood pressure in kids living near Los Angeles’ LAX airport than in those living farther away. A 1995 German study found a link between chronic noise exposure at Munich’s International Airport and elevated nervous system activity and cardiovascular levels in children living nearby. A 2005 study published in the prestigious British medical journal, The Lancet, found that kids living near airports in Britain, Holland, and Spain lagged behind their classmates in reading by two months for every five-decibel increase above average noise levels in their surroundings. The study also associated aircraft noise with lowered reading comprehension, even after socio-economic differences were considered. Citizen Groups Concerned About Effects of Airport Noise and Pollution Living near an airport also means facing significant exposure to air pollution. Jack Saporito of the U.S. Citizens Aviation Watch Association (CAW), a coalition of concerned municipalities and advocacy groups, cites several studies linking pollutants common around airports (such as diesel exhaust, carbon monoxide and leaked chemicals) to cancer, asthma, liver damage, lung disease, lymphoma, myeloid leukemia, and even depression. A recent study pinpointed ground taxiing by planes at busy airports as the source of large amounts of carbon monoxide, which in turn appears to increase the prevalence of asthma within 10 kilometers of the airport. CAW is lobbying for the clean up of jet engine exhaust as well as the scrapping or modification of airport expansion plans across the country. Another group working on this issue is Chicago’s Alliance of Residents Concerning O’Hare, which lobbies and conducts extensive public education campaigns in an effort to cut noise and pollution and rein in expansion plans at the world’s busiest airport. According to the group, five million area residents may be suffering adverse health effects as a result of O’Hare, only one of four major airports in the region.

Book Review on Mirage by Cynthia Barnett Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Book Review on Mirage by Cynthia Barnett - Essay Example S. through a combination of historical storytelling as well as exploring the issues from a technical perspective. The author is a renowned journalist with expertise in freshwater supply problems in the eastern United States. The book reflects the author’s ideas that greed and an overarching urge to develop new frontiers led Americans to exploit the eastern water system to sustain new activities such as larger populations and agriculture. Analysis and Evaluation Barnett traces the evolution of the current freshwater supply problem and blames human greed squarely for the resulting squalor. The author tends to blame historical titans such as Walt Disney and the Rosen brothers for wasteful development but it must be realized that these developments can be best analyzed in terms of their historical context. The development of the railroad and agricultural land in Florida closely resembled activities taking place nationwide in the Gilded Age. Expecting people from the late nineteent h century to anticipate modern problems of prodigal water use is asking for a bit too much. The wasteful attitude of the Floridians in general has also been brought into question such as the useless consumption of freshwater spurred by golf courses all over the state. Even with an abundant water supply, Florida faces water shortage by 2020 due to water expenditure on agriculture, urbanization and golf courses. The role of water as a political tool has been questioned as well by the author (Barnett, 2007, p. 44): â€Å"Those who control water control the destiny of a place and its people.† Barnett’s stance that most of Florida’s current water problems emanate from wasteful consumption is largely justified and can also be proven in fact. The author adeptly traces the political relationships between freshwater supply and globalization, population booms and real estate development. The role of the Army Engineer Corps has been presented as both positive and negative – the drainage of the Everglades produced ecological problems and changes in weather patterns (Barnett, 2007, p. 58) but the associated structures helped saved the lives of people living in Florida. This remains a unique perspective on the issue and tends to trigger an ontological egg and chicken debate on the role of the Army Engineer Corps. The author contends that the role of the Army Engineer Corps is debatable, yet it cannot be denied that their actions set in motion the current ecological failure of the Everglades and wetlands. Barnett blames both scientists and non scientific factions for causing water supply problems. The non scientific factions are able to bypass laws and continue with real estate and agricultural development while scientific factions are unable to counter these moves (Barnett, 2007, p. 64). A quick look at history and contemporary national and global politics reveals that scientists or green thumbs have been unable to stop the march of consumption ( Lind, 2013). The author tends to over assume the role and influence of scientists in any given governmental structure. Tradition proves that scientific opinion has been unable to stem the growth of personal vested interests and Barnett’s stance on the issue is unjustified. The author’s investigation of Bob Graham and his family’s role in the current crisis also deserves praise. Graham’s family has been criticized for exacerbating the situation by sugar farming, cattle ranching and urbanization based