The Medias Influence on Teenage Suicide Essay -- Teenage Suicide Essa

The Media's Influence on Teenage Suicide   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Fiction: Only â€Å"bad† kids who have the wrong friends and bad lives commit suicide. Fact: Kids who have the right friends and a bright future in front of them commit suicide. Fiction: Music, movies, and other forms of media do not influence teenagers in any way, shape, or form. Fact: Music, movies, and other forms of media are influencing teenagers to commit suicide.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Teenage suicide is on the rise at an alarming rate. While depression and other social pressures play a significant role in suicide among teenagers, there is evidence showing that music, movies, and other ways the media portrays suicide as glamorous and noble is having a major influence on teenagers considering suicide.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Every year more than 4,000 teenagers between the ages of 15 and 24 commit suicide and another 400,000 attempt suicide; the number of suicides may be even higher because many suicides are hidden by families who report the suicides as accidents or murders (Klagsburn 16). â€Å"Suicide now ranks as the third leading cause of death among people ages 15 to 24, trailing only accidents and homicides†(Worsnop 371). Over the past four decades, teenage suicide rose a staggering 200 percent (Waters 49). â€Å"Of all the suicides studied among people under 25, nearly two-thirds of them were committed with guns, teenagers who committed suicide by hanging themselves ranked second, and poisoning ranked third† (Colburn 5.)   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  There are many warning signs of suicide. A teenager contemplating suicide will drop numerous clues before attempting suicide. Such warning signs as withdrawal from the family, changes in eating and sleeping habits, as well as loss of interest in schoolwork or favorite activities, such as participation in athletics. Some teenagers express a preoccupation with pain, death, or suicide. They often talk of death and make actual threats to end their life. Many teenagers will drop verbal clues such as: â€Å"I might as well be dead,† or â€Å"you’ll be sorry when I’m gone.† (Goldstein, 55.) A preparation for death may take place, for instance, giving away prized possessions (Worsnop, 372-73). In some cases, the most ominous sign of suicidal intent is the sudden onset of apparent peace of mind after a long period of troubling behavior. Such a mood change may indicate the person has finally resolved to commit suicide and thus h... ...of Violent Entertainment. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998. Hutchings, David. â€Å"I Started Thinking about Dying.† People. February 18, 1985: 88-89. Keller, Julia. â€Å"Too Regular Shootings Have Left Many Numb.† Chicago Tribune.1 Aug 1999. Klagsburn, Francine. Too Young to Die. Boston: Houghton  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Mifflin, 1976. Newton, David E. Violence and the Media: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara: Instructional Horizons, 1996. Pond, Steve. â€Å"Student Body Count.† Rolling Stone. April 1989: 38. Royal Commission on Violence in the Communications Industry. Volume 1: Approaches, Conclusions, and Recommendations. Toronto: The Royal Commission on Violence in the communications Industry, 1976. â€Å"TV Suicide Link: Fatal Retraction.† Science News.October, 1987: 218. â€Å"Suicide Belt.† Time. September 1, 1980: 56. Trafford, Abigail. â€Å"Death at an Early Age.† The Washington Post. June 6, 1995: 6. Waters, Harry, et al. â€Å"Teenage Suicide: One Act Not to Follow.† Newsweek. April 18, 1994: 49. Worsnop, Richard L. â€Å"Teenage Suicide.† CQ Researcher 1.6   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  (June 6, 1991): 371-91. Zirkel, Perry A. â€Å"Another Case of Student Suicide.† Phi Delta Kappa. 77 (Sept. 1995): 91-94.

Money Makes the World Go Round

If used as a textbook in international political economy, the book â€Å"Money Makes the World Go Round† written by Barbara Garson is an outstanding book that illustrates the reality of how interrelated the modern economy has grown to be, and does so more concretely and evidently than textbooks can. In this book, Garson emphasizes that it is the restless flow of investment capital that distributes the gains and advantages of the free market, democracy, and the mass media to our progressively more borderless world. Simultaneously, Garson bewails the poverty and suffering visited upon the less fortunate billion individuals who bob like corks on the rising and falling economic deluge.The exposure that directs Garson to these assumptions makes for a picaresque account, meandering from the canyons of Wall Street to the oil refineries and shrimp farms of Southeast Asia, to a Maine factory town, and to then to the backwoods of Tennessee. Personally, I think that Garson’s casua l, from time to time loopy writing style might annoy certain readers. Nevertheless her voice is so determinedly good-natured and her intelligence so apparent that towards the end of this probing capitalist's Baedeker the reader can't help but trust Garson’s calm judgments.Garson’s journey started when she formulated an extraordinary strategy to discover just how †one world† we actually are. Garson had obtained a total of $34,500, as part of her cash advance for this book, invested the said amount, and then went after the money. A certain investment was placed in a privately owned small-town bank, which Garson thought would demonstrate †decent† banking ethics, free from the pressure to illustrate quarterly earnings increases.For almost the first half of the book, Garson tracks this money–or, relatively, money that may well have been hers but was in principle unfeasible to recognize as such. The day Garson deposited her money, the bank tran smitted $1 million or so to Chase Manhattan Corp., now J.P. Morgan Chase (JPM), its correspondent bank, to help fulfill a federal funds reserve condition. In doing this mission, Garson intends to work out what Chase would do with the money and trace those it consequently touched.Logically, there's no way to identify which fraction of any funds in fact belonged to Garson. Nevertheless it doesn't matter. The hypotheticals Garson turns up with are just as appealing as the verifiable facts in this book. With commendable firmness, Garson bangs on plenty of doors at Chase, and ultimately several do open. During the time of her study, the bank was distributing letters of credit and loans right and left to entrepreneurs and multinationals in Southeast Asia, and some of these Garson visit them.Thus, Garson flies to Map Ta Phut, Thailand, to observe a new oil refinery that is being in part –as Garson thinks– funded by her money. While in Thailand, she discovers a jellyfish expor ter and several shrimp farmers. Garson hypothesizes that all of them may possibly have benefited themselves of †her† money by means of Chase letters of credit.Garson's journey acted as a platform for her to investigate the effect of economic growth on the common folk. All the way through Thailand, Malaysia, and Singapore she chats up everybody ranging from small-business owners and plant managers to street vendors and migrant workers. Garson came to know that a lot of the people have left ancestral villages and families behind to get a grip in the growing economy.The book's second half unfolds in the United States. Garson has likewise invested $5,000 with the Mutual Series funds created and handled, during the time, by value investor Michael Price.During that time, Mutual Series have possession of approximately 20% of Sunbeam Corp. (SOC), whose revenue were failing. Price, who had earned his status by means of forcing firms to sell off properties or else release sharehol der value, aimed at Sunbeam for a restructuring. Under criticism, the Sunbeam board set up contentious turnaround artist †Chainsaw Al† Dunlap.The book is not without a political spin and a moral force. One of the most horrible villains we come across is Dunlap, the doyen of rationalizing. Throughout his stay at Sunbeam, Dunlap almost clear-felled the firm, wiping out thousands of jobs and lives, and even losing his shareholders a huge amount of money. It was the Sunbeam’s third restructuring in a period of ten years, and as Garson remarks â€Å"How many times can you squeeze a lemon?†The author’s sketch of Dunlap is remarkable. With passion, Garson demonstrates what she considers as his pretense and hypocrisy and the line of hogwash he fed analysts and investors.Nevertheless, there is a humanism and depth here that surpasses the potshots at Dunlap. During the sequence of her reporting, Garson nearly becomes a native of Portland, Tenn., the miserable place of a Sunbeam aluminum continued to close factories, fire workers, and outsource manufacturing. Garson skillfully describes the social drama of Portland natives bearing the loss of their livelihood. Then Garson’s next stop offers a sharp dissimilarity: Next, she heads up to the factory town of Biddeford, Me., where workers at Sunbeam's ill-fated electric-blanket plant evaded a shutdown through a hard-won employee takeover.Then, Garson ultimately doubles back to catch up on all her connections. In Thailand the growth has been busted. One of Garson’s interviewees, worryingly, has vanished, another one is studying English to get ready for the next growth. And in the United States, she restores communication with her Maine and Tennessee friends. Although these people are a world apart, Garson was able to obtain universal lessons regarding the unending strain of capital and the character of the global economy.According to Garson, half the world has never made or picked up a phone call, and that's the half struck hardest by tremendous fluctuations of capital. Eventually, Garson calls for deregulating capital flows—by means of taxes on currency transactions to regulate rumors — and †bail-ins† that compel banks to take in certain losses from their own bad loans. Nevertheless, Garson said that the goodies in this global village are very unequally distributed.'Garson’s conclusion is bleak; having compelled American businesses to combine and divest and break up over the last 20 years, there are hardly any bones left for the organized shareholders to pick, and as a result they're starting to concentrate on European companies. European investment and labor laws have so far avoided much use of the strip-and-dump method; however these laws are now being revoked by governments attempting to be business-friendly. And then when Europe's firms are exposed in a period of 20 years, what then? This section of the book connects pro perly to some experts’ assumption regarding growth typically being damaging to companies.Nevertheless, aside from villains, there are heroes in the book as well: smart engineers, farmers, clever engineers, aggressive young women coming from Isarn (North Eastern Thailand) who attack their own noodle shops, impassive factory workers from small town Southern USA and Mangrove Action Network protesters beating out policies in New York City.In the middle of all these entertaining and earthly stories, Garson elucidates with absolute lucidity how the international financial markets operate, the driving force of shareholder values, the growing dis-articulation between capital and workers, productivity and profit.   With this book as a textbook in international political economy, the reader can notice that Garson is resolutely on the side of the people and she creates an image, frame by frame, of how the globalized economy have an effect on people. This is a helpful reference book be cause it puts the â€Å"real† back into the economy.The story in Garson’s book can be replicated hundreds of times in numerous nations: capital comes and goes, however labor doesn’t; currency fluctuations produce debt; permanent social changes happen without the economic stability that may possibly mitigate their damaging effects. Then the reader will start to observe one of the focal problems in this entire argument, which is the separation of the social and the economic.Another supposition in the book is that there actually is a free market in the world economy that everybody, when they have become a producer, is contending in an open and fair field. The cruel circle of currency susceptibility beforehand, certainly, distorts such a picture; yet the simple truth is that traditional protectionism is flourishing and well in the richer countries.Upon reading the book, the reader will realize that exports coming from the less economically developed nations into the European Union — let alone the U.S. — are up against the harshest limitations, in spite of agreements achieved in 1994 in the Uruguay Round of tariff discussions.   Furthermore, governmental subsidy in the developed nations combines with protectionist tariffs in maintaining an extreme inequality in access to the legendary open market of globalizing premise.In reading the book, the reader will also be able to come up with challenging thoughts regarding the present mechanism of the global economy, which is to reflect if capital mobility can indeed be a cause in establishing permanent and catastrophic social changes and whether lip service to free trade is exactly that and no more. Moreover, one could also reflect on the diverse phenomena of debt, which play a vital part in the ongoing immobilization of local economies.Meanwhile, Garson’s book also made me think about the mercurial character of mobile global capital that makes it more difficult for projects to à ¢â‚¬Å"bed down† in their wider environment; they turn out to be divided from the areas in which individuals act and select, create relationships and establish loyalties.Lastly, this book is very helpful to people who wants to study international political and for those people who are attempting to study about the world of investing. When one reads the book, one will feel that Garson takes us on her own journey to study the international economy, and during the process of Garson’s journey, we will also feel as if we have met the faces and the individuals behind the entire process. I think that Garson handles the book with a very down to earth and open-minded approach, and for the main part, doesn't draw several of her personal conclusions. Instead, Garson lets the reader come up with his/her own conclusion.This book is truly a must-read and a helpful book because finally, certain detail and information regarding investing that is more than just numbers and returns is fin ally offered to the public. Thus, this book is highly recommended for anybody who is searching where to put/invest his/her money, or is just attempting to understand and recognize how â€Å"money makes the world go around.† After reading the book, one can confidently go to the Reuters newswires and have a knowledge and comprehension of just what is behind the newest news announcements, and most importantly, what they denote in genuine terms for real individuals.Reference:Garson, Barbara. (2001).   Money Makes the World Go Round.   Viking.

Rawls Trawls’ Theory of Justice, Hayeks Theory of Freedom

Friedrich Hayek was a British philosopher who wrote from his experiences of World War one in which he served. It is known that based on Hayek’s experience in the war and his desire to help avoid the mistakes that had orchestrated to the war; he was led to this career in which he developed the theory of freedom. Hayek argues that there are many definitions for the term freedom; however he refers to this as â€Å"freedom without coercion. Hayek also speaks to individual and personal freedom in which he argues that a man is either free or not free. Being free he says is acting on one’s own will and not the will of another and emphasises the idea that there are two types of freedom; freedom to and freedom from. When Hayek speaks to freedom, he makes mention of Political, Personal/Inner as well as Economic freedom. John Rawls on the other hand was an American philosopher who wrote from his experiences of World War two. Rawls developed the theory of Justice. Justice is a concept of moral relevance based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, religion, equity or fairness. Rawls refers to â€Å"justice as fairness† and from the theory of justice, the liberty and difference principle was derived. Rawls argues that â€Å"Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as information is of preparations of thought. † From the theory of justice the original position and the veil of ignorance were also developed. You can read also  Justice System Position Paper   These concepts will be explained further. The aim of this essay is to outline and formulate major distinctions between the two theories listed above by stating the similarities as well as the differences that tells them apart and evaluate both theories, subsequently justifying which of the two provides a better explanation. As was mentioned before, Hayek’s theory of freedom refers to freedom from coercion. The term coercion refers to the act of compelling by force or authority. In Hayek’s words â€Å"coercion can be explained as control of a person's environment or circumstances such that â€Å"he is forced to act not according to a coherent plan of his own but to serve the ends of another,† and so â€Å"unable to use either his own intelligence or knowledge or to follow his own aims. † Hayek went on to say that coercion means having control for the environment so that he/she acts in the interest of the person rather than the interest of their own. Coercion he argues is will, because it removes or eliminates the individual as a thinking person that should be valued and asserts that the only way to prevent coercion is through the threat of coercion. The coerced lacks the ability of using his knowledge for his own purposes, since the effective use of aptitude requires that one be able to predict to an extent the conditions that exist in one’s environment and adhere to an arrangement of action. â€Å"But if the facts which determine our plans are under the sole control of another, our actions will be similarly controlled. † p. 34 For Hayek coercion means doing the will of another and not his own and he gives an example of this, â€Å"Even if the threat of starvation to me and perhaps to my family impels me to accept a distasteful job at a very low wage, I am not coerced by him or anybody else. So long as the act that has placed me in my predicament is not aimed at making me do or not do specific things, so long as t he intent of the act that harms me is not to make me serve another person's ends, its effect on my freedom is not different from that of any natural calamity a fire or a Rood that destroys my house or an accident that harms my health. p. 137 However, what may seem to be coercion to some may not be coercion to others, hence, Hayek outlines that the following conditions must be satisfied in order to say that a person has been coerced; The coerced person's environment must be controlled by another so that, while he does choose, he is made to choose what will serve the ends of another rather than his own ends, The coercer must threaten to inflict harm with the intention, thereby, to bring about certain ends, That which the coercer denies to me must be crucial to my existence or to what I most value, That the act of the coercer must be directed at me. Upon careful examination, it will become apparent that Hayek's definition of coercion is radically defective, primarily because it provides no objective and clear cut standard of what is a coercive act but rather leaves it to individual judgment (with reference to what the individual most values) the determination of when a coercive action has been committed. Hayek speaks also about personal freedom and this he explains as â€Å"inner freedom† which he explains as metaphysical or subject freedom which is the extent to which a person guides his actions by his/her own will, reasons and lasting conviction as opposed to momentarily impulses or circumstances. Economic freedom, which refers to freedom from enterprise or state control and Political freedom which refers to freedom from arbitrary rule or arrest and the opportunities people have to determine who should govern and by what principles. To Hayek, the existence of government is not only permissible but also desirable and he considers, as most classical liberals did, that defence, police, and the administration of justice are indispensable functions of government. He asserts that these governmental activities are not hindrances to a free society, but its guarantees and he argues that the only interference in freedom government should have is preventing one from coercing another. For Hayek freedom means the rejection of direct control over individuals’ efforts and he argues that knowledge must be available, free, unrestricted or controlled and that our faith in freedom should rest on the belief that it will create forces of good rather than evil and that the benefits we derive from freedom depends heavily on how others use it, however, he argues also that we cannot achieve certainty in human affairs so we best make use of the knowledge we have. Thus we should stick to the rules of experience which best serves our way of thinking, although we don’t know the consequences of using this knowledge. He believes civilization is progress and progress is civilization. Hayek also speaks about liberty and stresses that the true meaning of liberty is liberty under the rule of law, rather than unlimited liberty. It follows that freedom of economic activity means ‘freedom under the law, not the absence of all government action’ (Hayek, 1960, p. 220). Rawls on the other hand speaks about the theory of justice, from this the liberty and difference theory was derived and the â€Å"original/initial position† as well as the â€Å"veil of ignorance†. Rawls argued that two principles serve to organize society; the â€Å"liberty principle† which is the first principle of justice that speaks to the fact that person is to have an equal right to the most freedom compatible with everyone else having that same amount of freedom and the â€Å"difference principle† which is the second principle which is an egalitarian conception that unless there is a distribution that makes both parties better off an equal distribution is to be preferred and speaks to the fact that social economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both reasonably expected to be to everyone’s advantage and attached to the position and offices open to all. Primary Goods is a term used by Rawls to cover all the things that the Two Principles of Justice are going to divide up. They are things like rights, opportunities, incomes, power etcetera. Rawls He rooted the original position in and extended the concept of â€Å"social contract† previously advocated by Hobbes, Rousseau, and Locke which made the principles of justice the object of the contract binding members of society together. The original position as that which representatives with limited information about the interests that they represent attempt to agree as to how society should be ordered and the veil of ignorance is the state of not knowing or having all knowledge or information for the alternatives but arriving at a position. This deal with the initial/original position which sets up a fair procedure that any principle agreed will be just. Rawls also speak of social justice which he states ‘is to be regarded as providing in the first instance a standard whereby the distributive aspects of the basic structure of society are to be assessed’; therefore, ‘they may not elucidate the justice†¦of voluntary cooperative arrangements or procedures for making contractual agreements’ (Rawls, 1999, pp. 7-8). For both theories, it can so far be seen that although both theories are different they also have similarities. The first similarity is that Rawls and Hayek both worked from the same tradition-liberalism in which they argued that individuals should to be free to pursue their own idea of the good life and that the state's role is as an enabler. Secondly, they both agree on â€Å"the essential point,† which is that principles of justice apply to the rules of institutions and social practices, but not to distributions of particular things across specific persons. Thirdly, the government is important and that the government exists to serve the people; the people do not exist to serve the government. Finally, they both argue agreed on the idea that the handicaps should be provided for. The differences as it relates to both theories are that; firstly, Hayek is from an economic standpoint while Rawls is more rationale and social. The main difference between both is their attitude to equality as Rawls believed in egalitarian and social justice which are two concepts that Hayek rejected as Rawls believe that each individual has different skill, talents and understanding hence they cannot be equal. Hayek argues that †Whether he is free or not does not depend on the range of choice but on whether he can expect to shape his course of action in accordance with his present intentions, or whether somebody else has power o to manipulate the conditions as to make him act according to that person’s will rather than his own. (Hayek, 1960, p. 13) His view is that one should work in order to achieve what they want and with this point of view, Hayek argues that ‘we may be free and yet miserable’ (Hayek, 1960, p. 18). In relation to Rawls’ definition of liberty, Hayek stresses that the true meaning of liberty is liberty under the rule of law, rather than unlimited liberty. It follows that freedom of economic activity means ‘freedom under the law, not the absence of all government action’ (Hayek, 1960, p. 220). Also, Hayek equates social justice with distributive justice and dismisses both of them. He claims that ‘liberalism aims at commutative justice and socialism at distributive justice’ and that ‘distributive justice is irreconcilable with freedom in the choice of one’s activities’ (Hayek, 1960, p. 440). In conclusion, I believe that Rawls theory of justice gives a better explanation as it is more accurate, I see this theory as the more applicable of the two to our society rather than that of Hayek’s as his notion of freedom and liberty is too wide and far-fetched for our developing societies. His notion on inequality and giving credit to the countries which are ahead is quite debatable, Rawls however believes in equal distribution of wealth. Rawls believes that if each individual is given the same opportunity then society will be just. Hayek on the other hand believes that each individual’s ability, skills and talent is different thus equality is impossible; this is to some extent true but distribution of state goods should be just and fair. Each individual should have equal opportunity regardless of social class or position. For Hayek an individual should be free to do as he so desires. How applicable would this be to our society? He argues that the government’s role should only to be implement sanctions for an individual’s action if they so believe that this individual has infringed on another’s right. Hayek further makes vague arguments that that the government should recognize and protect private domain and in doing so and that private persons will be given rules as to what the government will do in different types of situation. Again- inequality protruding.

Review of Carson’s Gagging of God

In The Gagging of God: Christianity Confronts Pluralism, author D. A. Carson describes three categories of pluralism: empirical, cherished, and philosophical or hermeneutical. [i] The first deals with diversity in America and the multiplicity of beliefs. The second, cherished pluralism, describes the approval of diversity as an unquestioned virtue. Finally, philosophical pluralism, under which religious pluralism falls, posits that no religion has the right to pronounce itself true and right. In other words, no religion can advance â€Å"truth claims† that are superior to any other.Carson states that postmodernism is the outlook that birthed philosophical pluralism. [ii] While I agree that pluralism is an important subject that benefits from the kind of attention given to it in the book, I believe the length of the book and the comprehensive nature of the material presented can make it difficult to follow at times. Furthermore, on several occasions the author seemed to move to the wider margins of the topic. However, as the implications of pluralism are pertinent and its integration with postmodernism significant, the information was extremely beneficial.The Christian must recognize empirical pluralism, tolerate cherished pluralism, but reject philosophical pluralism. We must recognize the diversity that exists in modern culture as Christians have throughout history. While pluralism poses new challenges in the current day, Christians have always had to stand up for the truth of Christian believe against other religions. Scripture was both inspired and written in a pluralistic context. However, even in the Old Testament God insisted that his people turn from the worship of other gods and other religions.For example, in Joshua 24:15, Joshua gave the children of Israel a choice to either serve God or Baal. The prophet Elijah would later give Israel the same choice in 1 Kings 18:21. Throughout history, God’s people have been reminded to be faithful to God as they were constantly surrounded by foreign gods and other religions. The same phenomenon applied during New Testament times. Christians resided in cities like Rome, Corinth and Antioch, Corinth, which were centers of diversity and multicultural exchange.They were surrounded by other world views, yet were constantly reminded that Jesus was the only way. This created a clash between Christians and other world views that would come to a head with the persecution of Christians. The Apostle Paul argued in the book of Acts that the true and living God superseded all other gods and preached Christianity against the backdrop of pluralism. There has been a need for Christians to do so ever since. Yet, while we reject philosophical and religious pluralism, in some cases, Christians are willing to cherish pluralism. In todays society, we cherish ethnic diversity.We welcome new members into our churches that come from various backgrounds even as God welcomes worshippers from every natio n, tribe, people and language. Carson states his purpose for writing, to equip Christians for fidelity to the gospel and encouraging unbelievers to find Jesus as Lord: â€Å"If anything in the following pages equips some Christians to intelligent, culturally sensitive, and passionate fidelity to the gospel of Jesus Christ, or if it encourages some thoughtful unbelievers to examine the foundations again and so to find that Jesus is Lord, I shall be profoundly grateful. [iii] In the book, Carson gives a comprehensive examination of pluralism. He takes the time to communicate with great detail on his positions and provides details that demonstrate his understanding of the subject. Throughout, Carson intimates the tension between the opposing perspectives of the pluralist and the Christian. From the perspective of the pluralist, the Christian appears to be a religious bigot unless they are willing to redefine Christianity without connecting it with Scripture.Likewise, from the perspect ive of the Christian, The pluralist is a misguided idolater no matter how sincere they may be. [iv] The book is divided into four sections, which tackle the major issues affected by the three types of pluralism. In the first section, the author describes the influence of hermeneutics and how texts are invariably interpreted against the backdrop of the interpreter's social â€Å"home† and the historical conditioning of the language itself. During this process, the interpreter takes bits of the text and â€Å"deconstructs† it to fit them into their own framework, which generates fresh insight.While this section also critiques postmodernism, Carson warns against giving the impression that modernism was a correct way of analyzing either the text or the world we live in. The second section deals with the philosophies of Derrida and Foucault that form the basis for postmodern thought, which is at odds with the Christian faith. While Carson opposes the idea of postmodernism, and criticizes the work of Foucault and Derrida, theologians such as James K. A. Smith, say thatCarson has misinterpreted their ideas and posits that they actually have an affinity with the central claims of Christianity. [v] The late German theologian, Karl Rahner recommended in his writings that dialogue should be used as the method by means of which plural theologies should strive for an understanding of each other. [vi] However, Carson intimates that the Christian needs to affirm that all interpretations are not equally valid because: God has revealed Himself and spoken clearly; and God has unfolded His plan of salvation and recorded it in Scripture.The third section of the book attempts to assist Christians living in a pluralistic culture by giving an understanding of assumptions made in the public sphere and replacing those assumptions with biblical truth. As we live in a world where public morality has seemingly collapsed, religion seems to be based on feeling and not on trut h. Carson says that ethical divisions are made pragmatically, making proper Christian thought necessary in making sense of the pluralistic world that we live in. vii] The final section of the book says that the answer to philosophical tolerance is the reiteration of Christian doctrine concerning the Second Coming and the nature of heaven and hell. Christians must have confidence in spreading this message in a compassionate way. However, it must be done with a sense of urgency, as the evangelism of our communities is paramount. Christians must have a deep conviction of the infallibility of Scripture and hold that it is inerrant and sufficient in order to both live a victorious life in a pluralistic society and to increase confidence in Christian doctrine. ———————- [i] Carson, D. A. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002, 13 [ii] Ibid, 19 [iii] Ibid, 10 [iv] Ibid, 238 [v] Smith, James, K. A. Who's Afraid of Postmodernism? : Taking Derrida, L yotard, and Foucault to Church (The Church and Postmodern Culture). Grand Rapids, MI. Baker Academic. 2006, 28 [vi] Fay, William Vendley. Pluralism and the theological methods of Karl Rahner: A critical assessment. January 1, 1983. ETD Collection for Fordham University. Paper AAI8802369 [vii] Carson, D. A. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002, 404

Changes in the Field of Civil Engineering Essay

Changes in the Field of Civil Engineering - Essay Example The aim of this report is to explore the changes that are occurring in the rhetorical practices in the field of civil engineering. Globalization, the computer evolution, population demand, scientific advancements as well as the growing concern for environmental and security in the field of material science, biotechnology, and nanotechnology are the key drivers of the changes. As the changes continue to emerge, students need to adapt, adjust and conform to the changes by acquiring more knowledge about the field that they otherwise would in the past. The adjustments need not only to be in the traditional sciences and math, but also to encompass emerging domains in engineering and science and knowledge in crucial areas such as leadership, communication, marketing, business management, and practical processes. In addition, students must be able to learn how to come up with innovative designs that are required for maintaining and enhancing the competitive advantage with respect to other n ations, and be able to prepare adequately to accomplish emerging professional challenges. Therefore, there is an urgent need to expand and improve civil engineering education (CEE), including professional innovators such as civil engineers with skills and knowledge required to develop novel designs, which can be patented. Over the past six decades, the United States has witnessed a significant reduction in the number of credit hours required for a bachelor’s degree in civil engineering. In fact, at present, America’s average hours stands at about 125 credit hours only. (Arciszewski and Russell 5). This is a huge reduction considering the fact that just decade ago, the U.S. average credit hours for a bachelor’s degree in engineering took an average of 135 hours. This emerging trend is, particularly driven by state funded universities, which are increasingly heeding to political pressure to reduce the cost incurred in undergraduate education, as well as to ensure that civil engineering students graduate in four years. It is also unfortunate that even private universities are increasingly adopting this trend in a bid to remain competitive. Presently, civil engineering education in the country is struggling with the blatant contradiction between the national, state, and local level needs, according to Arciszewski and Russell (5). The aim of this report is to explore the changes that are occurring in the rhetorical practices in the field of civil engineering. The field of civil engineering has undergone many changes over the years. This has seen most paradigms being replaced by the emerging concepts. As earlier stated, the changes that have occurred in the field of civil engineering are attributed mainly to the rapid technological advancements and globalization being witnessed in different parts of the world today. This has necessitated students to adjust in their learning in order to keep pace with the changing needs of the world in the field of civil engineering. According to Arciszewski and Russell, the engineering system evolution is driven by objective evolutionary techniques, known as patterns of evolution (8). They argue that this pattern applies to all engineering fields, including CEE and practice. Many studies that dates back to the 1940s found nine patterns of evolution in the field of engineering. However, the S-curve pattern is the most relevant in CEE. According to the S-curve pattern, engineering systems have undergone transformations following an S-curve pattern, when the relationship between time and specific characteristics of an engineering system are both taken into consideration. This implies that each engineering system has a life cycle that once completed give rise to another system based on different assumptions or different paradigm, as shown in figure 1. For example, when we consider airplanes, we realize that there are separate S-curves for propeller-driven airplanes, jet planes, and turbo-prope ller planes. In this regard, we end up with a family

Supply Chain Management Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Supply Chain Management - Research Paper Example Each member of the group was assign to a particular subject to work on. We wanted to start things of quickly as our experience from last year showed us that it is usually left for the last minute. To start with I was personally rather fortunate since my group was rather organised and from the start we did not have any 'no shows' or any attendance problems. We did not have an obvious leader within the team and all tried to put an equal amount of work and effort and I believe we managed to achieve this rather smoothly. In all, I felt we managed to work very effectively as a team and all members were contributing and involved in work. We decided to divide our analysis and assign a letter to one person, to research and draw out the main points. I for my part was responsible for hurdles of supply chain aspects which I believe were not that crucial to the analysis and thus I chose to look at two aspects, not just one. We all were developing our power point presentation and the report all together, more towards the end I tried to make sure that the slides were friendly looking and put all together. I am also one of the presenters since most of our members were not very keen on presenting; I decided to do this as I believe it to be a rather challenging but interesting part of the project. Personally, the field trip was quite interesting and wonderful. ... A hand on experience on supply chain activities in a real life situation is examined. While I was doing the research, every member of my group seemed organized and enthusiastic about the project, I felt comfortable working with them. Everyone managed to complete what they were supposed to do and the project was completed with no trouble. I decided not to present, as other members' language seemed more fluent and smooth. Student 4: I have spent a lot of time reading on the topic and done a lot of general research, consequently I could contribute some points to each section of the report. Along with country analysis we all have done some Experience and industry research to be able to evaluate the strategy for the company in relation to its potential entry supply chain theoretical framework. I was also actively taking part in presentation and report preparation contributing many improvement ideas, some of which have been used (Power Point slides' background colours). I was the person coordinating the work of my group. I was sending e-mails informing all members about the progress we were making and plans for upcoming meetings. I was keeping the attendance sheet from all the seminars, lecture workshops and group meetings. Additionally I always tried to make sure we comply with all the requirements of the course (regarding the presentation and the report). I think that the group meetings lacked a clear goal at the start but after the third week we had more regular meetings and a greater work ethic as a team. We had not appointed a leader at the start, which would have probably been best. One member of the group took charge by organising meetings, keeping us informed and generally pointing us in the right direction.

The decisions of a council in regulating operations within its Essay

The decisions of a council in regulating operations within its jurisdiction - Essay Example The researcher states that subject to the Food Vending (control) Act 2009, local councils are empowered to regulate trade within their geographical jurisdictions through licensing. The act provides that local councils, within their localities, can authorize trade in food substances through licensing and ensure regulation through revocation of licenses whose owners contravene requirements of the act. Subject to section 2 of the act, licenses can be revoked for misconduct or on grounds that the food supplies offered by the licensee are not safe for human consumption. The cases are based on the principle of delegated legislation and authority, and the scope of such legislations and authority. As a source of law, subsidiary bodies such as local councils and other government agencies are permitted to make laws and facilitate implementation of the laws. Similarly, authority may be delegated for implementation of primary legislation through formulation of policies. One of the basic principl es of such delegated legislations and authority is that they are limited to provisions of their parent acts that mandated them and any other superior source of law. A delegated legislation or authority can therefore not exercise more powers than is provided for by its authorizing legislation. In order to check on the concept of ultra ‘viresness’, the courts, when called upon, review implementation of delegated legislations to ensure that the agencies do not misuse authority to undermine rights and freedoms of their subjects.1 The scope of judicial review involves examination of the policy or decision in question to either approve, reverse or propose amendments to it. In exercising its review of delegated legislation, the courts look into a number of considerations. The first consideration is the conformity of the delegated legislation or authority to the powers as granted by the parent act. The aim of the courts would be to determine that the decision made in formulatio n or implementation