Decision Making Process Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Decision Making Process - Essay Example On a practical note, decision making involves identifying all possible choices of solution, analyzing the pros and cons of choosing each decision and finalizing on the appropriate one. The choice of appropriateness is further befuddled by number of other aspects. The perfect choice depends on identifying the stakeholders involved in the decision, the impact of it to them, the moral values, the ethical goodness and finally, the desired result. So, decision making even in its ubiquitous explanation, involves so much complication. In addition, if there is an added pressure that human lives are at stake at every decision being made, then every simple decision needs a humongous amount of thinking and courage to be put in by the decision maker. Such is the profession of nursing where the nurses are made to make decisions, day in and day out. Over the years, the facilities and teaching processes that back the profession of nursing have improved so much that the current generations of nurses are equipped very well on how to execute any decision that is made but there is still an element of uncertainty involved in their profession – the real time decision making process. Several researches have been done and methods have been proposed that guide the nurses in these decision making processes. ... The patient was operated for inguinal hernia mesh repair and had a LMA (laryngeal mask airway) in-situ to allow him to breathe as he recovered from the operation. The problem that she encountered in this setting was when the senior nurse decided to leave her in-charge for few minutes as she had decided to take a break. The fear of facing any emergencies alone; the possibility of aftermath that she had to face in case of any mishaps and, her inexperience prompted her to make the decision of questioning the senior staff. The inquiry included a question about the repercussions of leaving an inexperienced nurse alone with a just operated patient and a suggestion of possible replacement till the senior nursing staff returns. Patterns of Knowing Barbara Carper, in 1978, established four fundamental patterns of knowing in the belief that it could help a great deal for the betterment of the nursing profession both in teaching as well as learning aspects. It becomes mandatory to give a brief description about the four patterns of knowing before divulging more about their relationships with the decision made (Carper, 1978). Empirics: The science of Nursing According to this knowing, nursing is a science where the knowledge mainly focuses on empirical data. According to Barbara, nursing in this aspect is researched and theorized in terms of factual data so that most of the empirical knowledge can be analyzed to form laws and regulations that could provide a structure to the study of nursing. There is a strong urge among the nursing practitioners and researches in identifying the structures and models of nursing. And the output of

Liberalisation that Triggered the Asian Crisis and the Apparent Essay

Liberalisation that Triggered the Asian Crisis and the Apparent Insulation of China and India - Essay Example Least expected is that, in a very short period of time, a financial crisis sprouted in Thailand and spread like epidemic to the neighbouring countries of Southeast Asia and eventually triggered serious turmoil in the currency and financial markets of Japan and South Korea. While the extent of crisis differed from country to country, the Asian economies were brought face to face with serious difficulties that came from over-reliance on short-term foreign capital, speculative investments, and poor supervision by financial authorities. Even the resilient economies of Singapore, Taiwan, and Hong Kong have shown related problems, slowly being eroded by the persistent weaknesses of their neighbouring economies. What may have gone wrong that spelled the unfortunate events to take place? Why did some countries in the region, like China and India, have been unaffected by the crisis? What measures did these affected countries do to thwart the eventual downfall of their economies? What did policies did India and China foster in order to insulate them from the said crisis? As this paper explored answers to these questions, further recommendations by experts will also be tackled in order to prevent the same crisis from ever happening again. Liberalisation is termed as a programme of changes in the direction of moving towards a free-market economy. This normally includes the reduction of direct controls on both internal and international transactions, and a shift towards relying on the price mechanism to co-ordinate economic activities. In such a programme less use is made of licences, permits and price controls, and there is more reliance on prices to clear markets.

Impact of Stigma on the Fight Against AIDS

Impact of Stigma on the Fight Against AIDS Stigma is an essential constraint in the fight against AIDS. Discuss. 1500 words. In 2008, the World Health Organization argued that ‘†¦HIV-related stigma and discrimination are often prevalent within health services, and are critical obstacles to provision and uptake of health sector interventions. Stigma and discrimination—often pervasive at all levels of society—sustain an environment where it is difficult for health services to attract the people who most need the interventions.’ (World Health Organization HIV/AIDS Department 2008: p.12) As the same organisation reports, every day, over 6,800 people become infected with HIV and over 5,700 die. This paper discusses the way in which the stigmatisation of Aids sufferers impedes understanding of their condition, and the ability of society to address the problem holistically. It argues that society has a tendency to vilify target groups over problematical and divisive health issues, and offers earlier examples of these practices . Commenting on preventative measures in South Africa, the World Health Organisation again points out that ‘†¦it is important to collect information on higher risk male-male sex, on sexual behaviour among sex workers, on both injecting behaviour and sexual behaviour among injecting drug users, and on sexual behaviours in other groups that may be at higher risk.’ (World Health Organisation 2008: p.14) Whilst their analysis is based on positivist evidence, the identification of certain groups as most at risk introduces the parallel risk that they will be perceived by others – as solely or especially responsible for the prevalence of the condition. The urge to discriminate against a range of social groups appears to be a very deep seated one in Western societies. As Rothman points out, ‘Individualsearn prestige on the basis of their own efforts†¦or personal attributes (physical attractiveness, intelligence), but there is also a powerful structural dimension to prestige.’ (Rothman 1993: p.12). How ever, certain social groups appear particularly vulnerable to stigmatisation around issues of sexuality and disease: HIV and AIDS sufferers, it may be argued, are the latest group to suffer the re-interpretation of such prejudice. It seems fair to argue therefore that the defeat of stigmatisation is instrumental in the eradication of HIV/AIDS, and almost as important as the medical phenomenon itself. As one commentator puts it, If AIDS is to be defeated, war must be waged against poverty, ignorance, stigmatisation, violence and promiscuity.’ (The Economist 2002). Historically speaking, social explanations and interpretations of disease have always been mediated through cultural perceptions, and frequently manipulated for political purposes. Dirt, disease, sexuality and danger were frequently and unfavourably juxtaposed in public discussions of epidemics, whether relating to sexually transmitted diseases or not. A common theme in such discourses is a moralising view of the infected, and an inference that their behaviour was a major contributory factor in the spread of the disease to others. For example, when Cholera struck nineteenth century Britain, which had not yet developed a germ-theory of disease, its spread was attributed to ‘noxious effluvias’, ‘poisonous vapours’ and ‘obnoxious atmospheres’ generated in the environment of the poor and labouring classes. (Jones 1992: p.38) It was they who were effectively stigmatised with the dissemination of the disease, despite its prevalence amongst all social groups. As Mort reports, the official response was ‘†¦to isolate the human sources of infection, subjecting them to a regime of compulsory inspection and detention, combined with propaganda to educate the poor into a regime of cleanliness and morality.’ (Mort 2000: p.13) Official efforts to limit prostitution focused exclusively on female sexuality through the notorious Contagious Diseases Acts, which exposed any woman within certain geographical areas to arbitrary arrest, medical examination and detention. A common theme in these scenarios, many of which were mirrored elsewhere, is the subjective location of societal health problems in the behaviour and identity of disempowered groups. In each instance – as in the case of HIV/AIDS, responsibility for wider societal ills is linked to a largely voiceless faction, who not only  have poor lateral integration into society, but also less than sympathetic media representation. These behaviours and attitudes are obviously culturally mediated, and vary according to the host society: there is, however, no shortage of empirical examples. In Jamaica, otherwise respected social platforms such as evangelical churches and political parties, as well as popular music celebrities, combine the fear of AIDS with virulent homophobic attitudes. ‘†¦Dance-hall music—todays reggae—blasts across Jamaica. Its lyrics are often direct exhortations to kill gay people, or others who displease the islands gangs. Jamaica Labour Party supporters tauntingly played â€Å"Chi Chi Man†, a song about killing and setting fire to gay men, at their rallies during the general election†¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢ (The Economist 2004). Elsewhere, it has been shifting positions and indecision which have delayed an effective response. In Mozambique, educational programmes aimed at 14 year olds are of uncertain utility, because 40 per cent of the nation’s children do not attend school, and, as The Economist points out, ‘†¦their parents find it difficult to talk to them about sex. So do most public figures. Even ministers are loath to say they have taken a test. Rarely, if ever, does anyone famous admit to being HIV-positive.’ (The Economist 2002) This situation is mirrored in South Africa, where, as Campell et al. indicate ‘†¦many parents simply refuse to acknowledge the very possibility of youth sexuality†¦that their children are sexually active†¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢. (Campbell et al. 2006: p.132) The South African government has been engaged in a rearguard against international attitudes which, it felt, were unfairly slanted against its citizens. Recently however, it has rounded on the latter, admonishing those who it perceives as most responsible for the virulence of the disease. President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa said that ‘†¦You cant be going around having hugely promiscuous sex all over the place and hope that you wont be affected by something or the other.’ (The Economist 2002) Campbell et al. argue that such stigmatization is a form of ‘†¦Ã¢â‚¬ psychological policing†, where those who break power relations of gender and generation are disciplined and punished.’ (Campbell et al 2006: p.132). In Tanzania, Haram reports it is again women who are stigmatized in this way, through images of ‘defilement and displacement’: ‘†¦particular concern is directed towards the displacement of young†¦women, who m isuse their sexuality to achieve a†¦luxurious life , by luring wealthy†¦men†¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢ (Haram 2005: p.5) The overriding point here is that stigmatization, as much as mis-information and chimerical moral panics, are ultimately as damaging to those disseminating them as they are the stigmatized and abandoned victims of HIV/AIDS themselves. As Mort point out, ‘Two themes have surfaced repeatedly: competing understandings of perversion and normality and the social meanings attached to sexual acts and lifestyles.’ (Mort 2000: p.xviii) The obscuring and short-circuiting of accurate knowledge or effective counter measures merely ensures the continued presence of the infection in society, making it statistically certain that further innocent victims will fall prey to the disease. An analogy with earlier models of stigmatization illustrates this mechanism of self destruction. It was completely useless to persecute nineteenth century paupers and women as the sole sources of cholera or venereal disease, since this stood no chance of eliminating either condition. Similarly, the stigmat isation of women or the gay community cannot eliminate an HIV virus which is equally capable of infecting other social groups. In the twenty-first century, the social stigmatization of these groups overlooks the specificities of the condition, such as the growing convergence of HIV/TB epidemics. There are notable and laudable exceptions to these patterns of behaviour: for example, in Botswana, mining companies such as Debswana have introduced educational and non-discriminatory protocols as an operational strategy, not only for health, but for commercial survival. As The Economist points out, the company ‘†¦reckoned that if it did nothing, its mines would go the way of Zambias, which have to train four people for each skilled job in the knowledge that three will die. Even in 1997 the annual cost of AIDS per employee in the Botswana Diamond Valuing Company was calculated to be $237.’ (The Economist 2002) . As these pages were being written, the World Health Organization was attempting to polarize global attention and effort through an international AIDS effort, and focusing very much on prevention and understanding. First and foremost, we must do a much better job of prevention. This is the only way to get ahead and ensure an adequate long-term response. We u rgently need to scale up the use of proven context-specific prevention methods. We also need to expand linkages between sectors – for example, to introduce and scale up comprehensive sexuality education for young people.’ (Chan 2008). The problem is, as Haram argues, that such efforts need to be mediated through local knowledge, identifying the obstacles to behavioural change. (Haram 2005: p.9) Bibliography Campbell, C., Y.Nair, and S Maimane, (2006). Aids Stigma, Sexual Moralities and the Policing of Women and Youth in South Africa. Feminist Review 83 (Special Edition on Sexual Moralities). P. Chan, M., (2008), ‘HIV/AIDS: Universal Action Now’ World Health Organisation Website, INTERNET, available at http://www.who.int/dg/speeches/2008/20080803/en/index.html [viewed 5.1.08] Haram, L. (2005). AIDS and risk: The handling of uncertainty in northern Tanzania. Culture, Health and Sexuality 7 (1): 1-11. Jones, K., (1992), The Making of Social Policy in Britain, 1830-1990, Athlone Press, London. Mort, F., (2000), Dangerous Sexualities: Medico-Moral Politics in England since 1830, 2nd Edition, Routledge, London. Rothman, R., (1993), Inequality and Stratification: Class, Colour, and Gender, 2nd Edition, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Unattributed, ‘The Fear that Spreads Death’, The Economist, 25 Nov 2004, INTERNET, available at http://www.economist.com/world/americas/displaystory.cfm?story_id=3437101 [viewed 5.1.08] Unattributed, ‘Fighting back’, The Economist, 9th May 2002, INTERNET, available at http://www.economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_TTNDTDJ [viewed 5.1.08] World Health Organization HIV/AIDS Department, (2008), Priority Interventions, HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment and care in the health sector, WHO. World Health Organization/Unaids/Unicef, (2008), Epidemiological Fact Sheet on HIV and AIDS: South Africa, INTERNET, available at http://www.who.int/globalatlas/predefinedReports/EFS2008/full/EFS2008_ZA.pdf [viewed 5.1.08]

My Personal Strengths and Weaknesses Essay -- Personal Narrative Essays

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  I believe that life is a learning experience and being able to recognize our own strengths and weaknesses can help us become better individuals in anything we choose to do, whether it is positive abilities and skills that can help achieve our goals or negative personal areas that need improvement. Knowing yourself and what you can do, can help you recognize and overcome your weaknesses.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  One of my greatest strengths at work that I have recognized would have to be my ability to be a well-organized individual. I tend to write what I have to do down on paper and prioritize what is more important to least important. In doing this, it helps me organize and accomplish my work and meet deadlines that are important. A personal strength that I have at home is patience. I am a mother of a beautiful three year old little girl who is a handful. Patience is my greatest strength as a parent and individual which I possess especially being a single mother. I am a dedicated and hard working mother and I always make sure that my daughter gets the love and attention she needs.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  In my Learning team, my personal strength is having good people skills. I meet and get involved with new people everyday whether it be work or school related. I enjoy speaking, listening and giving input to my team members so that they are aware that they can count on me to participate as a team player in our Learning Team. Good people skills are very important in a group setting because of all the di... My Personal Strengths and Weaknesses Essay -- Personal Narrative Essays   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  I believe that life is a learning experience and being able to recognize our own strengths and weaknesses can help us become better individuals in anything we choose to do, whether it is positive abilities and skills that can help achieve our goals or negative personal areas that need improvement. Knowing yourself and what you can do, can help you recognize and overcome your weaknesses.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  One of my greatest strengths at work that I have recognized would have to be my ability to be a well-organized individual. I tend to write what I have to do down on paper and prioritize what is more important to least important. In doing this, it helps me organize and accomplish my work and meet deadlines that are important. A personal strength that I have at home is patience. I am a mother of a beautiful three year old little girl who is a handful. Patience is my greatest strength as a parent and individual which I possess especially being a single mother. I am a dedicated and hard working mother and I always make sure that my daughter gets the love and attention she needs.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  In my Learning team, my personal strength is having good people skills. I meet and get involved with new people everyday whether it be work or school related. I enjoy speaking, listening and giving input to my team members so that they are aware that they can count on me to participate as a team player in our Learning Team. Good people skills are very important in a group setting because of all the di...

Atheism vs Theism Essay

The problem Atheists have with Theists and the premise of God, a Being who is all good, omniscient, omnipotent and eternal, is that they believe that since science and the world cannot prove that such a being exists and since life seems to sustain itself without any external help, then this Being probably does not exists nor can this Being ever be proven to exist. This method of thinking stems directly from a belief, not that science is god, but more that mankind is a self-sufficient, self-reliant being along with the philosophy of materialism and evolution which denies the possibility of soul or the immaterial. This resulted in the hijacking of science to prove what materialists already believed, that everything is relative and truth exists only if it can be proven by science. This is, as a materialist already knows, an issue that can only relate to the corporeal. The conflict that occurs is many theists belief that there is a truth and it can be known by reason which includes science but also can be discovered using every aspect of the human person. This includes the spiritual, corporeal, and even the emotive aspect of the man. The another debate in this issue pits the clinging to classical thought by the theists against claim that classical thought is unsubstantiated, old fashioned and that only modern thought is relevant because it is the most progressive. So there seems to be an intrinsic impossibility for a materialist atheist to believe in God because it is diametrically opposed to the dogmatic belief in science, materialism, and man as a creature of nature not of the immaterial. The Atheists’ beliefs The atheists’ core beliefs have already been brought to attention but in order for a complete argument to take place, a simple overview is not sufficient, so a more in depth analysis is needed to better understand this ideological battle. To be fair to atheists, there is a diversity of ideas and beliefs why God cannot exist. Some of these reasons behind this belief can be simple and unfounded arguments or elaborate systems which argue God out of the picture. While it would be easy to discredit and disprove the simple arguments, such as â€Å"I don’t see God’s involvement in the world and it seems like the world functions on its own, therefore, God doesn’t exist,† there are plenty of arguments that have shown this type of thinking as shallow and wrong. The more significant arguments are the views of atheism include a mechanistic view of the world along with a materialist understanding of the operations of the world. This is the view, according to Edward Feser, that most serious atheists hold and is responsible for the understanding that God does not exist in the world, that the world is self sufficient and that man is simple a creature of evolution. Of course what follows from this belief is the understanding that man is not bound to anything spiritual or moral since there is no such thing as morals since that entails something immaterial. They believe instead that morality is either a construct of the mind, which is influenced by Kant, or that morality is the conditioning of the culture to make man feel guilty, which is influenced by Nietzsche. Feser points to the origin of this mode of thinking, explaining that it stems from the removal of the formal and final cause of things of Aristotle’s natural science in which all things have a material, efficient, formal and final cause. When the formal and final cause is removed then people don’t have a final end other than survival nor does anything have a nature or is there a correct form. What this does is it removes the importance of religion. When there is no afterlife or purpose of a person to be moral then there is no need for God or religion. Feser also claims that once formal and final causes were removed, and then it paved the way to materialism, which, if there is a formal or final cause of things, is the only reasonable understanding of the world. Materialism is the belief that everything can be reduced to their material function and there is nothing outside of empirical evidence. There means there is no soul or spiritual aspect of a human person. People are given the impression that science can explain everything, but Feser explains that â€Å"For the reason science has â€Å"explained† almost everything other than the mind is precisely because everything that doesn’t fit the mechanistic model has been swept under the rug of the mind, treated as a mere projection. † The very essence of today’s atheism is that the world can be explained and if there is something that cannot be explained then they say that science will explain it after we have a better understanding of the object in question. This belief that science can and will explain everything is held so strongly that atheists become as Feser describes them, â€Å"the very thing they argue against† namely, dogmatic and irrational. This is a result of the belief that there is no truth. Science, although it has improved the quality of life and has led to many discoveries, is to blame for a particular mentality that is felt all over the world, that of progress. Along with thinkers like Hegel, who believe that all of history is progress and that everything has been leading up to our point in time today, the mentality within science is that progress is always good. This is another assumption held by atheists in that they believe that science is progress and if there is progress then the time this progress was a lesser time and held views that were lesser and imperfect. So from this understanding, Christianity and religion in general is old fashioned and wrong, while science is right and the only truth that is, if there can even be truth. It is science that focuses on the efficient and material causes of things. In other words, it is science that ignores formal or final causes. Because of this belief it makes the place of religion irrelevant. Materialist atheists use science, the study of material objects with their molecular makeup and the like and use what we have discovered by means of science to explain questions of metaphysical nature. Feser explains that â€Å"empirical science of its very nature cannot give us the full story about these matters; but metaphysics just is the rational investigation if them. † Also on the same topic of the separation between religion and science, Stephen Jay Gould explains that â€Å"the net of science covers the empirical realm: what he universe is made of and why does it work this way. The net of religion extends over question of moral meaning and value. † (Gould p. 522) A conflict has occurred however because as was mentioned previously, when the final and formal cause is removed, then the nature’s of things don’t exist but so does purpose and without purpose then going beyond the what is impossible. Atheists hold central to their beliefs that there is nothing beyond this world and that all operations of the world are contained within it. Richard Dawkins believes rather that our â€Å"morality† has been changing and that the Old Testament God is â€Å"will not be adopted as a literal role model by anybody you or I would wish to know. † He means that social norms have been changing and that our morality can be explained through science of culture and society, not dependent on God or scripture. Dawkins continues saying that other aspects of the Christian religion are in conflict with science. He claims that the assumption of the Virgin Mary into heaven is false and assumes that heaven is a â€Å"physical reality – how else could the physical body of a woman go there? Dawkins brings this up to make the point that everything is under the realm of science; he even goes as far as to say that the â€Å"sudden injection if an immortal soul in the time-line is an anti-evolutionary intrusion into the domain of science. Dawkins’ point is that there is not a separation of religion and science; metaphysical claims are even under the claims of science. In the case of the mind, Dawkins and others believe it can be explained. And even though there is religion, it is a simple social construct to control the ignorant. Their truth is that science can explain everything even prove that a metaphysical world cannot exist. The Theist’s Side The theists fall back on something a little different, tradition. Now contrary to atheist’s beliefs, theism does use reason to justify keep God in the discussion but also to keep other metaphysical claims. Christianity has an understanding that the world is a transitory with God as its creator. From an understanding that God is creator, it is reasonable to expect everything in nature to abide by a law, to be ordered and have the ability to be understood. Also from the tradition of the philosophers of history, this belief has been thought over and many rational arguments have been made in favor of theism. These arguments even came from antiquity. Plato and Aristotle gave many arguments defending the immaterial. Both philosophers believed that the soul was immaterial and that all life had a soul or rather, the soul was the life giving principle. Now along with the idea of the soul, Aristotle provides an in depth account of the four causes mentioned earlier, namely material, efficient, formal, and final. This encompasses all aspects of substances. This provided a very thorough description of life. From the four causes, it gave reason to the nature of things and that there is a definite correct way of acting for any particular thing. So with the four causes, especially the formal and final cause, man now has a purpose and a proper way of acting. In other words, man then must have a morality it must adhere to. This morality has been lived out by people before philosophy influenced people; it is pre-science and therefore more â€Å"natural† to man. The fact that it is backed up by metaphysical observations only strengthens the argument for theists. Natural science, the understanding of the natural world is something lost upon atheists. It is essential to the proper understanding of this life to understand that there are, in fact, natures. As Feser puts it, â€Å"admit formal and final causes into the world and at once you are stuck –with God, the soul, and natural law. † This natural law is also vital to an understanding of life on earth as well as an understanding of the human person. While atheists struggle with an understanding of how the mind works (not the brain), have a very weak argument for morality, and have no argument for why anyone should have rights or respect shown to anyone, the theists however, have strong, well founded arguments for these very things which come natural to everyone. A theist understands natural law as participating in eternal law, this gives natural law authority. It is something which all men must abide by. Natural law is the respect and dignity which all men are due. It is what assures man that he shouldn’t kill one another. Robert Adams even uses this principle of the morality from natural law as a proof of God’s existence; he claims that â€Å"the moral rightness and wrongness consist in agreement and disagreement, respectively, with the will or commands of a loving God. † There are many laws within natural law that when broken are recognized as going against natural order, granting men the authority under God to rebel against whomever or whatever threatens to take away the privileges given by natural law. It is how we understand concepts of justice. This follows from the fact that God is just and any disobedience of this law is seen as unjust. God is the foundation of morality; natural law is the foundation of morality. Along with natural law, the theists also are able to give a better account of the mind. It is held that the mind is immaterial; it is directly tied to the soul. When the body dies, the soul continues on and we retain our â€Å"mind† because we retain rationality in the afterlife. In the same way Aristotle believed that the soul is the life giving aspect to all creatures and plants, so the human soul is also responsible for the mind and the intellect. Otherwise if the materialist view was to be accepted, we would have a similar thought process to any other intelligent creature without rationality. The mind is also responsible for the specific function of contemplation. No animal, even with a larger, more advanced brain would ever be able to understand concepts such as justice, peace, and generosity, it must be related to the form that humans have and the soul which humans have been given. This goes so beyond any physical aspect of our bodies that to confine the mind to ability within the brain seems foolish. Even the ability to learn concepts is a mystery. J. J. Haldane provides an analysis of the topic and explains that some concepts, especially early on, must be taught. Someone must have taught concepts to people. The example he gives is the example of a cat. One might see a cat and understand the concept of cat, but what if one had never seen a cat? It would be necessary to explain the concept of cat to that person, after which the person would be able to recognize a cat if he saw one. The same applies to all concepts. Now the tricky part is, if evolution is taken back to the origin of man or even if God created man, then how did man learn all of these concepts? Haldane’s solution to the question is that God must have been responsible, regardless of whether evolution is responsible for man or not. The reasoning behind this is that God must have taught the 1st man all these concepts which he could then pass down to his children. While this explanation requires an open mindedness of the listener, it is very plausible and would account for many of the questions that atheists still deal with today. So Who’s Right? So while some might claim that there isn’t even a right answer and that choosing to be an atheist or theist is just personal preference. However, according to the theists, there is truth and there is a right answer. As for atheists, while some of their positions were explained, they still have gaps within their arguments. When confronted with these gaps, it seems that atheists are unable to provide an answer other than resorting to science which asks how and why, but not â€Å"that† something is. As mentioned earlier, there is the question of morality and why people act as they do. Even Atheists believe in some sort of morality even they do not wish to call it by its name. Feser cleverly points out that â€Å"An atheist or naturalist can believe in morality – that is a psychological fact – but he cannot have a rational justification for his belief – that is a philosophical fact. † It is impossible to limit the natural drive for morality in people. Again, â€Å"where morality was concerned, Kant’s aim was to show that there is just something in the nature of reason itself that requires that we be moral. † This seems oolish to believe that something material explains something as complicated as human emotions and the free will to do good or bad and the consequences it has on the person itself. Feser points out that the understanding of modern atheists of morality is a conditioning itself, all of modern philosophy tries to prove that everything can be contained by science, even the topic of morality. He is convinced that this is due to a rejection of formal and final causes. He explains that â€Å"the bottom line is that by abandoning formal and final causes, modern philosophy necessarily denied itself any objective basis for morality. This points to how modern philosophy has gotten to this point and it is simply that modern philosophers have ignored the question of whether there are formal and final causes and have considered the topic as irrelevant. What this means however that â€Å"First, the modern â€Å"mechanistic understanding of the natural world has led to problems, paradoxes, and absurdities that are far more egregious than anything the scholastics were ever accused of. Second, Aristotelian formal and final causes are simply unavoidable if we are to make sense of modern science and reason themselves. Now as has been shown, theists hold on the Aristotelian views of formal and final causes not only does it make sense, but it provides a foundation for a host of other arguments. These arguments cannot be explained away by science, Feser points out why, which is because â€Å"empirical science of its very nature cannot give us the full story about these matters; but metaphysics just is the rational investigation of them. † to make a further point, as has been suggested, it seems that an atheist’s account of the mind is also insufficient as it is a series of poor and confusing arguments which try to prove the existence of mind within a person. Feser claims that the reason for the misunderstanding of the mind by atheists is that it is â€Å"the denial of final causes that most clearly poses an absolutely insurmountable obstacle to any attempt to explain the mind in purely material terms. † What this means is that with this understanding of purpose for the human person beyond survival, then there is new meaning to a person’s life and that each person should and ought to work to fulfill this purpose. If not, then it is impossible to explain the mind sufficiently. The reason for intellect, the purpose of the mind, is contemplation but also to use reason to become virtuous. Once morality is believed to exist, then it follows that morality should be followed but the only way to do that is to form habits of virtue, which is only possible through the mind. It also hints at the soul, which is also taken to exist in that it is the principle of life but more specifically, nothing corporeal could be the principle of life or â€Å"every body would be a living thing. † More specifically, Aquinas explains that since the intellect has an operation apart from the body â€Å"per se† then we must conclude, therefore, that the  human soul, which is called the  intellect  or the  mind, is something incorporeal and subsistent. So according to Feser, the only way to solve this problem that the atheist’s have of the mind, is to â€Å"return to the Aristotelian –Thomistic conception of the soul as the form of the body, having certain immaterial operations but nevertheless â€Å"interacting with the material world as formal rather than efficient cause. † Feser also hints at there being a need to be intellectually honest about some of these arguments. Since many Atheists have ignored the arguments or Aristotle and Aquinas, Feser has been calling for them to actually refute them and that instead of wanting something to be true and trying to argue for it, to instead accept truth as an objective reality and something to be sought after. The point that Feser wants to make is not to â€Å"determine whether this project was good or bad, but rather to emphasize that to a very great extent it was a desire to further the project, and not an actual refutation of Aristotle, that moved modern thinkers away from his metaphysics. The agenda determined the arguments rather than the other way around. This is ultimately the solution to the question to atheism because it seems as though Atheism is artificial, Denys Turner implies that atheism has to be ‘worked at or practiced in his article â€Å"How to be an Atheist. † It is the mentality of trying to convince others that your reality is truth instead of being receptive to truth as the classical and medieval philosophers were.

1831, by Louis P. Masur Essay

This book was written by Masur Louis   P. who described 1831 as the year of the eclipse that had so many omens that stated that the American society was completely changed. Every aspect of life including the political, social, economic and cultural all underwent a metamorphosis that brought about change. In that year, foreigners visited America and they described it as a year where there was a possibility of a civil war occurring in America due to the many negative things that were happening then. An English visitor Frances Trollope felt very disappointed with how America had gone about to deal with slavery and he even criticized the vehement expressions of insane and hypocritical zeal as it was preached by the preachers. The writer states that most of the visitors had no intentions of talking about the institution of slavery, but they could not turn a blind eye to it and their writings helped to create controversy on slavery in America and therefore putting pressure to allow the issue to be addressed (Louis 2008).   Some of the visitors who helped to shape the institution of slavery included: Henry Tudor, Thomas Hamilton, James Boardman and Ales de Tocqueville. The issues that have been described in this book are based on four thematic chapters; slaverly and its abolition, religion and politics, state and nation and finally, the issue of changing technology with the use of machines and nature (Louis 2008). In the same year, there was a lot of violence and rebellions over slavery, tariffs and religious revivalism over the nation. He talks of a revolution that was led by Nat Turner who he describes like a very intelligent, charismatic and religious leader. He rebelled against slavery and the authorities even hunted him for questioning where he confessed about having taken place and led the rebellion. His actions brought a lot of attention towards America and it was at this point it was concluded that the slaves were not loyal and content, that slavery was not benign as it was thought to be and that trying to control the population through terror groups was not the way out. The outspoken nature of Nat Turner inspired many of the abolitionists who made calls for emancipation of slaves. There were unresolved tensions between the states and the nation’s rights, competing passion for religion and politics. The debate on the emancipation of slaves has also been described where the people from the north expected it to be a slow and gradual process, but the people from the south saw it as a necessary evil. Masur P.L stated that the way to deal with the problem was to set up a colony in West Africa as they believed that the Africa Americas were helpless and hopeless people who could not be able to rise above their conditions and state of living. It was described as the year when the Southern oligarchy quit the possibility of doing away with slavery and William Garrison demanded that there would be abolition of some peculiar institutions. His newspaper, the liberator, was meant to make people see the evils of the day which by then they did not see. The nullification crisis and the Indian removal act further made the sectional differences and with the changes in technology it made dramatic changes in America’s relationship with the land. The author describes the American people as people who were in love with technology and therefore referred to them as the locomotive people (Louis 2008).   The introduction of steamboats, railroads and the mechanized reapers made people very rich because of the profits that were being made. The author also describes the protestant missionaries as the people who worked on behalf of the Cherokees. They held a large numbers of slaves yet thirty years later they were barely mentioned and the Cherokees fought on the side of the confederacy supporting the very people who had thrown them out of their ancestral land and nobody dared to raise their voice against it. Policies that were made by Andrew Jackson against the Cherokee erase the last hopes of seeing the India as being autonomous. It was thought that religion would hold the nation together and help to counter their forces of disunity caused by the vast and large territory occupied, the numerous and the very increasing high population, the diversity of the local interests ,the power of selfishness and the feeling of sensational jealousy and hate had   prevailed amongst the people of America.   The religious revivalism that swept the country inspired the working class to agitate. It gave an insight in the idea of enthusiasms for religion as it was with even the tent meetings that were supposedly supposed to bring about reform of the individual together with the reform of the society at large. It also indicates the surprising rise of political movements such as the anti –masons which was America’s third party that invented the presidential nominating convention. The Andrew administration threatened to unravel and dissent the economic future of the country (Louis 2008).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   In conclusion, the author not only writes about the negative issues that affected America but he also has intellectual pleasure that helps to savor the hypocrisies of the day by stating that although the Turners revolt saw many white many people maimed and killed, at least they were happy because women were never raped. He goes on to say that they finally saw the need to keep in control the terror gangs and groups and began to give a doctrine that slavery was indeed benign and that the enslaved were loyal, content and more satisfied than it was previously believed. As much as people from the north and those from the south were outraged by William Garrison’s radical newspaper, their opposition against it only helped to popularize and circulate the paper which has today become one of the largest selling papers today. For the people from South Carolina, they took pride in the doctrine of nullification as it meant that they could resist the federal Government to interfere with slavery. References Louis, Masur P. 1831: Year of Eclipse .United States: Barnes and noble.com lnc, 2008.   

How To Write Blog Post Introductions That Hook Readers

How To Write Blog Post Introductions That Hook Readers There are eight  other people reading this post along with us. In just a few minutes, there will only be the two of us. Dont believe it? The challenge was already insurmountable.  People read about 18% of your blog post. Readers are overwhelmed with information and are  purposefully not reading  for their own sanity.  Heck, weve been bemoaning the death of reading since 1991, and even again in 2007. So what to do about getting readers to read? How do you keep people reading to the end? Master The Art Of Blog Post Introductions And Keep Your Readers Reading via @JulieNeidlinger A  Blog Post  Introduction Must Have A Hook Let me introduce you to introductions.  Introductions are first impressions.  You get to make them once. Your blog post introduction must have a hook. Here are six good hooks to use in your blog post introductions. 1. Start with an interesting fact. "Niagara Falls has traveled  7 miles upstream in the past 12,000 years. Let's hope you're growing your web traffic at a faster rate." Start with a fact that is interesting, because not all facts are. Facts that are uninteresting are facts that: Are overused and often repeated. Too common in your niche. Related perfectly to your topic in an unsurprising way. Pick facts that have nothing obviously to do with your topic (Niagara Falls and website traffic?), or are perfectly in line with your topic and thesis, but are so shocking as to be gasp-worthy.  Unrelated facts make the reader think "how is this bozo going to tie that into the topic at hand?" while shocking facts make the reader think "that CANNOT be true, can it?!" Either way, it's a hook. 2. The end of the story first. There are two ways to tell the end of the story first and have a successful hook. Find a way to tell the end of the story without giving away the surprise. "The 20,000 customer registered in our system, and the team let out a victorious yell. We'd hit our goal, thanks to the red button." How does the story end? Because that's a perfect place to start. In this example, the introduction tells the reader what happened, but it doesn't do so in a way that ruins the surprise. There's a lot of action, both by the final customer and the team. There's the suggestion of a competition and success (a goal was met). And there's a cryptic suggestion that a red button did something amazing. Plus, 20,000. That's impressive for anyone wanting lots of customers. This would be a less effective version of the introduction for that post: "After five months of intense A/B testing in which we tested different CTA button colors, we finally hit 20,000 customers. Red was the winning color." Yawn. There is jargon. There are unexplained acronyms. An inanimate button has become the winner instead of the people (customers and the team). What little action there is, is passive.  And you spilled the beans on what the post was about: A/B testing colors. Give a heads-up summation without giving away the surprise. This method gives your reader some respect by saying "hey, this is what I'm going to talk about with you today. If this is interesting, stick around."  Derek Halpern tends to get right to the point with his blog posts, and often introduces them by telling readers what they can expect if they keep reading. Adding "a quick request" is a fine bit of intrigue for the reader. "What in the world could Halpern want from me?" the reader thinks, and keeps on reading. Knowing what's coming and how things will end is helpful for readers. It gives them an idea of whether or not they should take the time and what expectations to have. The danger for you, the writer, is if you have an unexciting topic and give your readers a heads-up  to that. "Today I am going to talk about the value proposition of going paperless at your office, and ultimately prove that you will want to buy a small scanner and ban the paper." Meh. That's not an introduction to remember for all eternity. Halpern's version has a bit more intrigue and zip, though, admittedly, some readers will appreciate the above example. It has its place, but isn't the greatest hook. 3. Use an anecdote. "I once wrote a newspaper story that killed a man." That's the actual blog post introduction I wrote on a post for this blog. It's a one-sentence anecdote. That's an extremely short anecdote; most anecdotes are longer, like those you find in this post about social proof in which several anecdotes are used. Anecdotes are wee bitty stories that put a larger idea or thesis in a different context. Speakers know that starting with a story instead of a philosophical or fact-filled lecture is a sure-fire way to get people's attention. It's the same for your readers. What makes a good anecdote? Something that happened to you, in your life. This makes you the expert on how to apply the story and what it means. I would rather hear an anecdote about your trials and failures rather than the tired anecdote of how many times Edison tried to invent the lightbulb. Something either funny or poignant. Make 'em laugh or make 'em cry (or somewhere close). At the very least, end at a different level than where you started. You start at ground zero with your reader. Your anecdote can't end there. It's no hook if it does. Something related to your thesis. Don't be that speaker that tells a random joke or story and then segues with an "but I digress" and launches into Yawnville. Your anecdote should illustrate your thesis in a new way, or start leading the reader's thought patterns towards where you want to take them with your thesis. A quote can work. Quotations can work, and sometimes make a fine opening. But people quickly get in the habit of using the words of others to boost their own, so watch out for overuse of this technique. And avoid quotations that are overused for your niche. Steve Jobs had some good things to say,  but after a while, those excellent words lose their power because they are overused. Find new quotations from surprising sources. And avoid quotations that are overused for your niche. Steve Jobs had some good things to say, but after a while, those excellent words lose their power because they are overused. – @JulieNeidlinger 4. Ask a (worthwhile) question. Yes, there are stupid questions, and a good share  of them are rhetorical. In their best use, asking a question is a fine way to force the reader to identify with the problem you are about to solve. Questions can be powerful. But some questions are a waste of time. Go easy with  rhetorical questions.   "What are we going to do about your low-performing blog?" Rhetorical questions cannot be answered by the reader. They are asked not to prompt thinking or discover knowledge, but to make a point. They are often dramatic. They can be insulting. "Have you stopped beating your dog yet?" is a classic example. The question assumes someone is being cruel to an animal. It can't really be answered. Or "How do you solve a problem like Maria?", which assumes first that Maria is a problem. It's similar to what I see  being used a lot in lead generation and calls-to-action where one button says "Yes, I want more traffic. Take my email!" while the other button says "No, I want to see my website die a painful slow death." Rhetorical questions set up the reader in a similar, psychological way. The reader has to accept the underlying assumption in order to answer. It can work, but if you make an offensive or insulting assumption, your reader leaves. Use rhetorical questions carefully. Don't ask questions intended to limit the answer. Pet peeve alert: I despise  when people speak in questions so they can pre-empt any difficult or real questions and give softball answers. Here's how it works (and I'm sure you'll recognize the technique): "Do I love web traffic? Yes. Did I mean to send my disgruntled blog readers a skunk in the mail? Of course not." By asking the questions you, the writer, want to answer instead of providing the answers the reader wants, you can create the appearance of forthright and complete discussion without actually doing so. Plus, you slip into passive voice of sorts, where you don't own the action and behavior. How does that work in an introduction? "Do I love web traffic? Yes. Do I know the secret to building it? You bet." Ok, we get it. But what a waste of your reader's time. "My love of web traffic is bested only by my ability to build it." Kind of a silly  example, but you get the idea: be direct, not passive. Do you want more traffic on your blog? Write better blog post introductions with these tips.Don't ask obvious questions. Every time I find myself tapping out an introduction that starts with "do you want more traffic on your blog?" I'm sure somewhere a philosopher dies. What I'm trying to do is tell the reader "yes, this is the post you were looking for" but what I'm really telling the reader is "I don't know how to write." "Do you want more traffic on your blog?" Really? That's your Bob Woodward? "98 percent of blog owners want more traffic. Yeah, we don't understand that remaining two percent, either." You can identify with your reader without asking them obvious questions that they skim over. 5.  Go for the  cliffhangers. Robert Bruce  (who is someone else entirely than Robert the Bruce)  is a writer and a tease. Once in a while but not too often, mind you he sends out an email of Unusually Short Stories. He also posts them on his web site. He is all sparseness and tortuous brevity, his unusually short stories impeccable. They hook, and leave you hanging off the cliff. One of Robert Bruce's unusually short stories. Take a page from Bruce's book: these are the introductory paragraphs that get readers hooked. I know, because I've sat and stared at them willing the next sentence to appear (which  will not happen). I'm a firm believer mimicking and dissecting the successful work of others as a form of practice. Artists often paint from the masters to learn about color, light, and technique (I've done it). While at a writers' conference a few months ago, best-selling author James Hall told of a class he taught his graduate students (which included Dennis Lehane) where they were instructed to find a novel they loved and write their own novel based on the structure of it. He later turned this class into a book called Hit Lit: Cracking The Code Of The 20th Century's Biggest Best Sellers. So let's look at Bruce's example. What makes it work? It's only two sentences, and I'm dying to read the next paragraph. The setup tells us there is a competition known only to us (we have exclusive knowledge). There is a setting, both in place and time. And we know the startling end result. The cliffhanger isn't what happened next, but what happened in between. How do you get from intriguing point A to hilarious and startling point Z? So. A cliffhanger can be either "what happens next" or "what happened in between." Let's say your headline was: How We Went From Zero To 10,000 Customers In Just One Year.   Here's an example of a "what happened in between" cliffhanger: "We started with  three team members  and a plant in the window. One year later, we were taking sledgehammers to the office walls." The rest of the post talks about how you grew your customer base, and how it meant your team grew, too, and you had to expand your office space. (Or how things went poorly and you demolished the office in a fit of rage, but let's hope not.) 6. Gentle confrontation can be a friend. "You were getting 100 new sign-ups a week, and thought your email conversion rate was as good as it could get. But you were wrong, and I'll tell you why." Confrontation is sure to get a reader's attention. Of course, not all confrontation is created equal.  There is insulting and trollish confrontation (always wrong), and there is gentle confrontation. A gentle confrontation takes a soft  swipe at a controversy, or pokes a long-held belief of the reader in a way that encourages them to read on and reconsider. What happens when you do that? The reader feels indignant and keeps reading if only to prepare to prove you wrong. Or the reader is intrigued and keeps reading to see if it's true. The reader skips to the end and leaves a ranting comment never having read your post, meaning you have to gently say "but I said that later in my post." So in the case of the first reaction, gentle confrontation can be a friend. In the case of the second reaction...less so. Either way, introductions that are confrontational can often lead to active comment sections.