Delve Deeper into the AMCAS Personal Statement

With the vague prompt of ‘†¦explain why you want to go to medical school’ and a limit of 5300 characters, it can be difficult to know how to approach the AMCAS personal statement. Also, you’ve probably spent the last couple of years focused on technical writing skills, so it can be difficult to shift gears back to writing in a more personal way. Therefore, let’s turn our microscopes on the AMCAS essay to get a better understanding of what med school admissions officers are looking for in your application package.1. The essay should be about youWhile this may seem obvious, the med school admissions officers are looking for a meaningful essay that will help them get to know you better. While it is fine to write about others who have had a significant influence in your life, the focus of the essay needs to be you – the applicant. If you are going to write about others, do so briefly and make strong connections back to your personal reasons for appl ying to medical school. Give the reader confidence that you are making your own decision in choosing medical school and have the determination needed in order to become a doctor.2. Highlight the ‘why’ and the ‘how’By applying to medical school, the admissions officers already know the ‘what’ of the essay. Even so, it can seem intuitive to write about all that you have done to qualify yourself for medical school. These accomplishments are important, but they’ll be covered in other parts of your application package. For the AMCAS essay, help the admissions officers understand your motivations in choosing to become a physician. What aspects of your experiences and your personality led you in this direction? What choices have you made in life to support this decision? Your particular ‘why’ and ‘how’ will be different from those of anyone else, and this is what will give the admissions officers insight into your char acter and potential.3. Be descriptive and go into detail The journey to becoming a doctor is one of a thousand steps, and it can be tempting to try to include all of them in the essay. However, trying to do that in only 5300 characters can result in a superficial essay that blends in with the crowd. In choosing what to write about in your AMCAS essay, select anecdotes where you can bring the reader into your world and experience the event alongside you. Provide the reader with descriptive detail to help the admissions officers understand the significance of these events in your journey.4. Stay positive, even about difficult situationsWriting about challenging situations can make for great essay writing. However, it is important to keep a positive tone throughout. You may have seen injustices in access to medical care either at home or abroad. It may have happened to a near relative or even to you. Even so, the AMCAS essay is not the place to write about larger issues of reforming th e medical system or criticizing the actions of a particular individual. Instead, write about how the negative experiences inspired you to improve the lives of your future patients and their loved ones.5. Submit a professional essayMedical school is a graduate professional program, and your essay should reflect that you have a level of professionalism sufficient to begin this process. Therefore, have at least one and preferably two or more people take a look at your essay. If there’s a gap between how the readers perceive your essay and what you meant, you may want to do some rewriting. Finally, the essay should be proofread for grammar, punctuation, and spelling.Most of all, let your unique personality and passion for medicine shine through in your AMCAS essay.

Free Essays on Differences In Gender Communication

All of us have different styles of communicating with other people. Our style depends on a lot of things: where we’re from, how and where we were brought up, our educational background, our age, and it also can depend on our gender. Generally speaking, men and women talk differently even though there are varying degrees of masculine and feminine speech characteristics in each of us. In association with their own genders, men and women, tend to speak in ways that reflect common characteristics of their own sex. In the workplace today, as it has always been, communication has remained a key ingredient to running and maintaining a successful organization. However, with the changing times since women have become able to complete tasks at the same level and efficiency of men, controversy has arisen, and now more than even it is imperative that communication remain a solid foundation and characteristic of both genders. Differences in communication are the results of many varying factors. The two genders have dissimilar goals and attitudes when communicating. Women on one hand want to achieve status, and avoid failure. In order to do so they pursue them in a semblance of connection. Men, on the other hand want to achieve involvement and avoid isolation, and pursue them in an appearance of opposition. Two disparate lenses are created from the differing perceptions of the male and female. One the connection lens and the other the status lens. Women are the connection lens because they tend to look for similarities to achieve connection, and equality. The males in opposition portray the status lens because it is they who look for differences to achieve status. From childhood on, boys and men try to â€Å"one up† each other. Their actions can lead to stronger personalities. Those who like to give orders and be leaders achieve the higher status, and the weaker personalities are those who accept the orders, are subordinate, and therefore receiv... Free Essays on Differences In Gender Communication Free Essays on Differences In Gender Communication All of us have different styles of communicating with other people. Our style depends on a lot of things: where we’re from, how and where we were brought up, our educational background, our age, and it also can depend on our gender. Generally speaking, men and women talk differently even though there are varying degrees of masculine and feminine speech characteristics in each of us. In association with their own genders, men and women, tend to speak in ways that reflect common characteristics of their own sex. In the workplace today, as it has always been, communication has remained a key ingredient to running and maintaining a successful organization. However, with the changing times since women have become able to complete tasks at the same level and efficiency of men, controversy has arisen, and now more than even it is imperative that communication remain a solid foundation and characteristic of both genders. Differences in communication are the results of many varying factors. The two genders have dissimilar goals and attitudes when communicating. Women on one hand want to achieve status, and avoid failure. In order to do so they pursue them in a semblance of connection. Men, on the other hand want to achieve involvement and avoid isolation, and pursue them in an appearance of opposition. Two disparate lenses are created from the differing perceptions of the male and female. One the connection lens and the other the status lens. Women are the connection lens because they tend to look for similarities to achieve connection, and equality. The males in opposition portray the status lens because it is they who look for differences to achieve status. From childhood on, boys and men try to â€Å"one up† each other. Their actions can lead to stronger personalities. Those who like to give orders and be leaders achieve the higher status, and the weaker personalities are those who accept the orders, are subordinate, and therefore receiv...

General Characteristics of the Public Housing in the U.S. Market Term Paper

General Characteristics of the Public Housing in the U.S. Market - Term Paper Example In the United States and Canada [9], public housing is usually a ‘block of purpose-built housing operated by a government agency, often simply referred to as "projects"’ The history of the specific sector is formulated under the influence of a series of events and governmental decisions that seek to intervene in the private initiatives regarding the formulation and the operation of housing associations designed especially for the needs of the public. In this context [9] ‘in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, government involvement in housing for the poor was chiefly in the area of requiring new buildings to meet certain standards - like having airshafts - for decent livability; most housing communities were developed from the 1930s onward and initial public housing was largely slum regeneration, with no nationwide expansion of public housing; public housing was only built with the blessing of the local government, and projects were almost never built on suburban greenfields, but through regeneration of older neighborhoods; the destruction of tenements and eviction of their low-income residents consistently created problems in nearby neighborhoods with "soft" real estate markets’. As for the modern era [9], many of the above-described projects have been ‘torn down, renovated or replaced after criticism that the concentration of poverty in economically depressed areas, inadequate management of the buildings, and government indifference have contributed to the increased crime. U.S. public housing continues to have a reputation for violence, drug use, and prostitution, leading to the passage, in 1996, of a federal "one strike you're out" law, calling for the eviction of tenants convicted of crimes, especially drug-related; in reaction to the problems surrounding public housing, the US Congress passed legislation enacting the Section 8 Housing Program in 1974, which Richard Nixon signed into law, to encourage the private sector to construct affordable homes; this kind of housing assistance assists poor tenants by giving a monthly subsidy to their landlords’.

Socialization Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Socialization - Research Paper Example For others, there is just a willingness ‘to care for others’ (Calabrese 2004, p.21) without necessarily to focus on healing people. Emphasis should be given on the following fact: through the years, nurses tend to forget why they had become a nurse in the first instance (Calabrese 2004, p.21). It is assumed that the responsibilities of the particular role are many leading people to feel stressed and to feel less motivated towards nursing. Swansburg (1996) uses a different explanation for describing the willingness of people to become a nurse. According to Swansburg (1996) people are attracted to nursing just because of the challenges of the particular role (p.447). It is noted that through nursing people are given the chance ‘to realize their potentials’ (Swansburg 1996, p.447). It is implied that nursing is quite demanding, as a role, and requires people to put all their efforts in order to face the role’s daily challenges. At the same time, nursing offers people the opportunity ‘to show their creativity’ (Swansburg 1996, p.447). This is achieved by taking initiatives for facing emergent problems but also for managing cases that are quite complex and where there are no standardized solutions. In addition, nursing can be quite attractive to people that aim to communicate and cooperate with others (Swansburg 1996, p.447). A successful nurse needs to have high communication and cooperation skills, as the effective management of a case usually requires the use of plans that need to be supported by medical practitioners in different positions; for example, a patient who is severely traumatized due to an accident needs at the first level the support of the emergency medical staff, at least one medical practitioner and one nurse; at the next level, the patient will need a highly skilled surgeon supported by a team of appropriately trained nurses. When recovering, the patient will need the support of a nurse who will assis t the patient when developing the recovery program. Nurses have a critical role in arranging the above activities ensuring that all phases of a treatment plan are precisely followed so that the cases for failures are minimized (Swansburg 1996, p.447). From another point of view, Swansburg (1996) notes that people are likely to enter nursing only because they need to feel as members of a family (p.447). According to the above view, nursing can offer to people the sense of love and care, not only towards others but also towards themselves (Swansburg 1996, p.447). One of the most critical conditions for entering nursing seems to be the gender (Newell 2003, p.2). In fact, it seems that nursing is primarily a ‘female profession’ (Newell 2003, p.2), meaning that women are much more likely to be attracting to this profession compared to men. In any case, caring for others seems to be the key reason leading people to become a nurse (Newell 2003, p.4). The term caring in the abo ve case has many aspects. It can refer to the support provided to others in regard to a health problem (Newell 2003, p.4). Caring can also reflect the need of people ‘to connect with other human beings’ (Newell 2003, p.4). It should be also noted that caring, as a reason for entering nursing, has many implications. Taking risks in behalf of others is a critical aspect of caring in nursing (Newell 2003, p.4

CE Marking Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 4750 words

CE Marking - Essay Example Whenever in a conflict between any of the social responsibility and their responsibility to their employer they are quite clear about the strategy they should opt. The project too suggests a few guidelines to resolve any such conflict. Among various responsibilities of the engineers a few are to look into the EU Documentation and Standards, technical consultation, compliance testing, technical documentation, product registration, company-internal self-certification process and many more. Then there are various CE marking related issues, its objectives and the difficulties faced by the manufacturers in the process or due to any of the discrepancies. So, the project caters to all the above mentioned issues as well as the role of engineers employed by the manufacturers in the whole procedure. CE Marking, also known as CE mark, is a mandatory conformity mark to be put on the products which are placed on the single market in European Economic Area (EEA). The affixation of the CE Marking on the product which is placed on the market or put into service means that the product meets all the necessary requirements of the relevant European Directives. ... A few examples of European Directives requiring CE Marking include toy safety, low-voltage equipment, machinery, terminal equipment and EM compatibility. And there are about 25 directives requiring CE Marking. If you are planning to export a product to one or more markets in any member states of EU or EEA then it becomes essential to apply for CE Marking of your products. "CE Marking is a mandatory mark for most (around 70%) of the products sold on the EU market (totalling 28 countries.)"1 it can be crucial to your success if the new product directives apply to your product and you also want to continue exporting it to the European market. It becomes very necessary to seek the professional help and advice to assist the manufacturers in conforming and acquiring the CE Marking. It is very essential for business and is a very swift and straightforward process if you seek genuine advice. It is very important to understand the amount of resources and the time that companies spend on a product and to obtain a smooth approach for CE Marking. And if your company is outside the EU, the process becomes all the more challenging but the capable engineers can do the job well. And as the process is essential for business it is better to have knowledgeable engineers to do the job and to ensure that your products comply with all basic requirements. They know well how to get the products CE marked understanding all the safety issues that are important to address.2 Responsibility and Actions taken by Engineer for CE Marking As it is very crucial to acquire CE marking, it becomes necessary for the firms to seek the help of some consultancy or engineer to guide them to do so and to ensure that their product complies with all European Directives. For CE Marking there are

Ageing and Disability Policies | Country Comparison

Ageing and Disability Policies | Country Comparison Gian Nestle Sorronda Aging and Disability Task 4 4.1 Disability United States of America – In United States of America, they made an act that would help lessen or eliminate discrimination in the country for those people who have disability. This act was created back on 1990 and was called the Americans with Disability Act or ADA which prohibits discrimination towards the disabled person in any sector of the community. This is from employment, transportation, public accommodation, communication and any other government activities. The services of the mentioned should be suitable, reasonable and realistic for the individuals with disabilities to be qualified. New Zealand In New Zealand, they have formed an act that would help and give benefits for the disabled person. The act was called The New Zealand Disability Strategy which was created last 2001. This act pointed out 15 objectives that would basically address the needs of those individual who are suffering from disability. This was made to make sure that New Zealand does have a long term plan for these individuals who are perceived by the society as different. This act also will pave way to changing New Zealand’s point of view from a disabling society to an inclusive society. United Kingdom – In 2010, the United Kingdom replaced the act that was established in 1995 and called the Disability Discrimination Act. It was changed to The Equality Act of 2010 and the goal was to address the discrimination against age, gender, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, civil partnership, marriage, and lastly the disability. This act was established to make sure that the mentioned group or part of the society receives adequate help. The help should be fair enough and proper to make sure that it will comply with the act. Similarities and Differences: The similarities of these two policies are that they wanted the people of their country and their respective community to treat the people with disability with fairness, equality and without discrimination. This means that they need to encourage and allow education for the disabled individual, ensure that their rights are met, proper employment, aware on how to access services, life style choice and allow them to live with a quality life. On the other hand, differences are also noticeable especially in the part of United Kingdom wherein they included the disability together with other part of the society. Unlike the United States of America and New Zealand, they have created a separate act and strategy for those disabled individual to make sure that their needs will be addressed immediately. Aging United States of America – They have established an act for the older people to make sure needs are met. It is called the Older American Act which was established back on 1965. This was created to provide each community to have services for the aging people. This was passed due to the concern that was arising during this time that older people are not receiving appropriate care in the community. The government mostly funds the services that will be provided to the person though there some nonprofit agencies as well that helps out for the services, the government is still the primary provider. United Kingdom – The Equality Act of 2010 by the UK Government also covers the needs and the rights of the aging population by receiving adequate help from them and treat them without discrimination by the public and from the society. This covers from their employment, education and training. One individual who in fact is aging doesn’t lose their rights to be able to work and support themselves. They can continue to be employed as much as they like or pursue any education that they would like. New Zealand – In New Zealand, there are two current act and strategy that is in place and active. One was established in 2001 and called the New Zealand Positive Aging Strategy and the other is the Health of Older People Strategy which was established in 2002. Both of these act has only one goal which is to provide a proper care and place for the aging people and live a quality life despite their age. Both of these also encourage the government or guide the government to have agencies to be able to provide the kind of services that these older people need. Starting from a place where a person can age and still is able to have a quality life until to the services that are needed from transport services, communication and etc. Similarities and Differences The similarities with these act and strategy are that they are aiming one goal for the older people. These acts are a representation from the government by each country that everyone has the right to receive proper care as they aged and that the government is still accountable for them. These countries are well aware as well that they need to fund the services that will be provided to aging people. Their respective government mostly provides the funding and they also linked with other nonprofit or local government unit to provide proper assistance, care, transportation needs, communication needs, mobility needs and that they will not be discriminated in any part of the society from employment to other services for the aged. The differences are mainly how these acts are established. Both US of A and New Zealand created or established a different and specific act and strategy to address the aging population while United Kingdom created a broader aspect as aging was included to their Eq uality Act of 2010 which covers from gender, religion and disability. 4.2 Disability United States of America – The Americans with Disability Act of 1990 or ADA provides services such care in a hospital, education and public transport to the disabled individual from the government. This means that services are being funded by the American government to give out proper care to those who are affected. This is by way of the creation of sub group of the government to particularly provide these cares and also from an individual or private sector but still fully funded by the government. United Kingdom – The Equality Act of 2010 by the government solely addresses the needed guide on how to provide cares to the disabled people. This may be by the government or any private service provider. This is to make sure that cares and services delivered from or by a public hospital, educational institution, nonprofit organization and local government unit are aligned to the act. This is also to ensure that there is no discriminatory act anywhere from banks, shops, colleges, transport services, taxi and public bodies. New Zealand – the New Zealand Disability Strategy of 2001 provides guide on how to be able to give out proper care and services to an individual who is suffering from disability. This is to make sure that services given to them are associated and calibrated by the act. This is also one way of making sure that DHB’s or District Health Board, General Practitioner’s or GP’s and other private and local agencies are providing care without discrimination and that they are providing their care according to the act. Similarities and Differences The similarities within the acts of these three countries are that all of them can be able to apply for those individual who are affected by mental disability and physical disability. These acts were established for them to be able to have an access whenever they needed help. Especially when an individual that has disabilities have been discriminated by and in the society. Lastly, the main goal of these acts is to provide fairness in giving out care and services for an individual who has disability. On the other hand, the difference between these acts is that for the United Kingdom, they merged together 116 legislation and made into an act which will provide better service for the disabled. Some services as well are publicly funded and there are services that are not and could be subsidized by the government and the family. Aging United States of America – The Older American Act of 1965 was established to provide community services for the aging people whose services are often funded by the government and some are provided by a private agency. This is to ensure that older people can still improve their lives in relation to their income, health, housing, employment, long term care, retirement, and community services. The purpose for the act is to provide and enhance the ability of an aging individual to maintain its independence and to be able to stay and interact still in their house and in their community. The funds are given from federal funds wherein it is allocated solely for the purpose of the act. United Kingdom – Since the act made by the UK government replaced previous laws and made into a one act which made it to be easier to grasp and understand. The act just clearly states that providing care for the aged people should be without discrimination. They should be receiving the same treatment as what others received as well. The law particularly states that an individual should be receiving fair treatment when they receive services from the government or any other local government unit and should not be discriminated due to their age. This also covers not only for the services but for education, transportation, accessing the services and communication. New Zealand – This is to ensure that Kiwi’s or New Zealanders will receive proper care and have a significant life while coming to age. The strategy made sure that they will be able to acquire services whenever they needed from DHB’s or District Health Board, in the community and whenever they use transportation. The strategy also made sure that aging individual can still receive services like health and wellness, financial security, independence, self fulfillment, a good and living environment. Similarities and Differences The similarities between these acts by different countries are they aim to make sure that service deliveries are well provisioned and there is fairness in the services given to the older and aging individual. Due to the rampant discrimination of other citizens in these said countries, their government created this acts and their primary goal is to have a positive aging for each individual such as employment of mature workers, changing the society’s attitude towards older people and last the protection of the rights and interest for the older people. On the other hand, there are noted services that are available for the older people that are competent enough to be able to provide idealistic care and services for them but there are also incompetent services such as supporting their life style, recreation and their cultural belief. References: Administration for Commnity Living. Older Americans Act. Retrieved from http://www.aoa.gov/AoA_programs/OAA/ Age UK. The Equality Act- What It Means for You. Retrieved from http://www.ageuk.org.uk/work-and-learning/discrimination-and-rights/the-equality-act/ Equality and Human Rights. What is the Equality Act? Retrieved from http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/legal-and-policy/key-legislatures/equality-act-2010/what-is-the-equality-act Ministry of Social Development. The New Zealand Positive Aging Strategy. Retrieved from https://www.msd.govt.nz/what-we-can-do/seniorcitizens/positive-ageing/strategy/ Office of the Disability Issues. New Zealand Disability Strategy Objectives. Retrieved from http://www.odi.govt.nz/nzds/progress-reports/july01-sept01/new-zealand-disability-strategy-objectives.html Americans with Disability Act of 1990. Retrieved from http://www.ada.gov/pubs/ada.htm Division of Aging Services. History of Older Americans Act. Retrieved from https://aging.dhs.georgia.gov/history-older-americans-act Utilitarianism: The War On Iraq Utilitarianism: The War On Iraq Utilitarianism is the concept that the moral worth of an action is determined exclusively by its contribution to overall utility, that is, its contribution to happiness or pleasure as summed among all people. It is thus a form of consequentialism, meaning that the moral significance of an action is concluded by its outcome. Often described as the greatest good for the greatest number of people  [1]  , the topic can be classified as a quantitative and reductionist approach to ethics. With advocates such as John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham, it is a subject that is perhaps one of the most famous within ethics, Mills book Utilitarianism exemplifies this, as most scholars educated in the subject will be familiar with the work. In relation to the current war in Iraq, the subject is as relevant as ever. However, as with most ethical theories there are differing branches. The main debate within utilitarianism is the act vs. rule question. Act utilitarianism states that, when faced with a choice, we must first think about the likely consequences of potential actions and, from that, choose to do what we believe will result in most gratification. Rule utilitarianism, on the other hand, begins by looking at potential rules of action. To decide whether a rule should be followed, you must look at what would happen if it were constantly followed. If adherence to the rule produces more happiness than otherwise, it is a rule that morally should be adhered to at all times. Some argue that rule utilitarianism collapses into act utilitarianism, because for any given rule, in the case where breaking the rule produces more utility, the rule can be sophisticated by the addition of a sub-rule that handles cases like the exception.  [2]   For the purpose of this essay, we will mainly consider act utilitarianism in relation to the Iraq war. Obviously there are massive questions surrounding the ethical reasoning behind the invasion in Iraq, particularly on the part of the United States, but also in the UK where it is one of the big issues in current news and has been since it all began in 2003. The actual reason for the invasion of Iraq is often queried and there has never been an answer given that can be 100% proven. For example, the main reason given by Bushs government in 2003 was the now infamous Weapons of Mass Destruction. Although advised that only some degraded remnants of misplaced or abandoned chemical weapons from before 1991 were found, they were not the weapons which had been the pretext for the invasion  [3]  , yet it continued regardless. Some US officials also accused Iraqi Dictator Saddam Hussein of supporting al-Qaeda  [4]  , and other reasons were given such as spreading democracy in the count ry  [5]  , Iraqi government human rights abuse and Iraqs financial support for the families of Palestinian suicide bombers  [6]  . The sceptics amongst us will also point towards the oil factor in the war and many believe the sole reason for invading was fuelled by fuel itself. Even Americas elder statesman of finance, Alan Greenspan, said I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil.  [7]   Before utilitarianism and Iraq is examined more closely, the first factor to be considered in any ethical dispute about battle should be the Just War Theory. This concerns itself directly with the ethical debate preceding any conflict, and the actions of combatants concerning ethical execution of warfare. These two distinctions are called Jus ad bellum, i.e. the morality of going to war, and Jus in bello, meaning the morality of action within a war. Both have specific criteria to be addressed and identified before war may be decided ethical. Going to war is just, according to this theory, when there exists a just and proportionate cause, meaning the cause is right, and the seriousness of the issue merits the grave decision to fight. Secondly, right intention, earning a fuller peace will be achieved after war than is possible in the absence of war, and right authority, asserting only those with authority can declare war, must both be fulfilled as well. Lastly, there must be a reasonab le chance of success, and war must be the absolute last option.  [8]  Looking at this list, you could argue that before the invasion even took place we were dealing with a wholly unethical concept. As people cant decide on one definite reason as to why the war in Iraq actually began, it is difficult to argue that there is a just and reasonable cause. Moreover the fact that many believe the war is simply for oil again poses problems for those who would say the right intentions are behind the war, and the fact that Iraq is such a volatile state anyway indicated that the chances of peace after the war are slim. In February 2003, the U.S. Armys top general, Eric Shinseki, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that it would take several hundred thousand soldiers to secure Iraq  [9]  , perhaps indicating that there wasnt a reasonable chance of success either. Also in 2003 French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin stated we believe that military intervention would be the wor st solution  [10]  , in direct contrast to the idea that war should be the absolute last option. All of these would suggest that before utilitarianism has been considered, the war in Iraq is unethical anyway, as if there is such a concept, it is not a just war. Many people might question whether any war can be a just war but World War II is one of the few wars that nearly everyone believes was morally justified. Nazi Germany and Japan were dangerous regimes that committed atrocities against conquered peoples, and many nations felt that they needed to be stopped. For these reasons, some refer to World War II as the good war. In contrast, the social and political turmoil caused by the Vietnam War was based, in part, on debate over whether that war was justified.  [11]   Following on from this, there are also many legal questions surrounding the war in Iraq. With regard to utilitarianism, it is clear that something illegal should not be for the greatest good for the greatest number of people as the UN and even representatives of supporting countries such as the UK have spoken out against it. Kofi Annan, the Secretary General of the United Nations, said of the invasion, I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN Charter. From our point of view, from the Charter point of view, it was illegal.  [12]  Furthermore, Lord Bingham, the former British Law Lord said the war was in serious breach of international law. He went on to accuse Britain and the US of acting like a world vigilante, obviously not a tag youd associate with an ethical war. Bingham said: Particularly disturbing to proponents of the rule of law is the cynical lack of concern for international legality among some top officials in the Bush administration.  [13]  If utilitar ianism is the moral significance of an action being decided by its outcome, then an invasion that besides removing Hussein doesnt seem to have achieved much in over 6 years, and is arguably illegal anyway, then the war in Iraq seems completely unethical. There is lots of literature that covers the topic of utilitarianism and one essay written to offer evidence of its worth as a moral premise, and to retort to common misapprehensions about it is Utilitarianism by John Stuart Mill, who will we look at in more detail later. Utilitarianism is defined by Mill as a theory originating from the belief that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. He classifies happiness as pleasure and the absence of pain and continues to argue that pleasure can fluctuate in quality and quantity. Furthermore Mill considers that pleasures that are embedded in your higher faculties should be superior to more base pleasures. Additionally, it is argued that accomplishment of goals such as virtuous living, and other achievement of ambitions and purposes should be considered when thinking about ones happiness.  [14]   Mills thesis embodies his effort to respond to the condemnations of utilitarianism, and thereby to provide a more intricate and distinct moral hypothesis. Reasons that the theory had been criticised include that it does not afford sufficient defence for individual rights an issue which as we will discuss later, Mill himself championed. Another criticism is that happiness is more difficult to understand than shown by the theory and gauging everything by the same standard is not satisfactory or realistic.  [15]   Mill reasons that the theory of utilitarianism overlaps with natural emotions that derive from the social personalities of humans. For this reason, people would innately incorporate these values as an ethical requisite, if the general public were to integrate utilitarianism itself as an ethic. He argues that happiness is the solitary foundation of morality, and that happiness is the only thing that society desires. This claim is backed up by explaining that all the other entities of individuals aspiration are either methods to happiness, or are taken into account when happiness is defined. In a verbose manner Mill describes that the concept of justice is actual fact sourced from utility, and that things like rights subsist simply for the reason that they are essential for individual content.  [16]   The argument for utilitarianism encompasses five chapters. His opening chapter provides an introduction to the essay, and in the following chapter, Mill presents some common delusions about the theory and considers the definition of utilitarianism. The third chapter is an analysis about the definitive incentives that the theory can offer. The penultimate chapter examines techniques of establishing the soundness of utilitarianism. In his fifth and last chapter, particularly relevant to this essay owing to issues like the Just War Theory, Mill writes about the relationship between justice and utility, and argues that happiness is the foundation of justice.  [17]   Looking at the fifth chapter of Mills Utilitarianism in more depth, we can deduce many ideas that also relate to the war on Iraq and whether it is a just or ethical war. The first section of the chapter is largely descriptive as Mill begins by saying that throughout history, one of the major obstacles to the reception of utility has been that it does not tolerate a supposition of justice. Whether or not the justice or injustice of an act is something inherent and separate from questions of utility is what Mill attempts to determine in the chapter. Mill commences by attempting to pinpoint the definition of justice, by coming up with a list of things that are often described as just or unjust. In trying to define justice, Mill considers many factors, including legal rights, deprivation of something someone has a moral right to possess, whether a person receives what they deserve or not, violating agreements, the injustice of preferentialism in improper situations, and finally the notion of equality as an element of justice. In the mainly descriptive first part of the chapter, Mill counters the assertion that utilitarianism is opposed to justice. He mainly writes about the classification of justice and its origins historically and it is also noteworthy that Mill does not offer his own conjecture about what is required for justice. From Mills point of view, justice is not a theoretical model so much as it is a feeling about morality that lots of people possess. As a result, in defining justice Mill studies what other people denote by the term. He concludes that justice exists for the reason that people believe it does, and it means what they consider it to mean. Beginning at the accepted understanding of justice, Mill envisages what associates a different set of ideas about the theory. Subsequently, he puts forward that they are amalgamated by the concept of rights, an idea he brings in through his claims about perfect obligation. For Mill, a right insinuates that an individual has a legitimate entitlement that the social order is to guard them against any desecration. Many advocates of utilitarianism write off the idea of rights, and many debates about the subject are based around whether rights do actually exist, but Mill held a different perspective. Having just defined justice, Mill now turns to the question of whether the sentiment of justice comes from a special, unique tendency of nature, or whether it can be linked to the concerns of utility. Mill argues for the latter. Mill contends that there are two components to justice. The first is the desire to punish a person who has done harm. This desire comes from the impulse of self-defense, and the feeling of sympathy. All animals have instincts of self- defense. However, unlike animals, humans are capable of sympathizing not only with their offspring, but with all human beings. Furthermore, humans are more intelligent, and thus have a wider range of sentiments and are able to feel that they are a part of a broader community of interests. Justice then, reflects the natural feeling of retaliation, expanded by sympathy and intellect to apply to things that harm society at large. In themselves, these feelings are not moral sentiments. Justices moral component can be seen rather in the quality of the outrage people feel at an injustice: people can be upset by an injustice not only if it affects them individually, but if it goes against the interests of society at large; this demonstrates a moral concern. The other component of justice is that there is an identifiable victim who suffers if justice is infringed upon. Mill argues that the idea of a right is not a concept separate from justice, but is rather a manifestation of the other aspects of justice, namely the desire for punishment and the fact that there is an assignable person who has been harmed. A right means that a person has a valid claim on society to protect him in the possession of that right. However, if one wants to know why society should defend this right, Mill argues that the only reason is one of general utility. The sentiment of justice derives its intensity from its link to the animalistic need for retaliation. It gets its moral force from the impressive kind of utility that is involved in rights violationsnamely the interest of security. People cannot do without security, and require before they can enjoy anything else. Security is so fundamental that its difference of degree as a form of utility becomes a differ ence in kind. It is so important that it takes on a feeling of absoluteness, of moral necessity. Mill then observes that if justice exists independent of utility, if it is a standard in its own right that can be understood through introspection, then it is difficult to understand why questions of justice are often so debatable. In fact, there is as fierce a discussion about what is just as there is about what is useful to society, and it is guided by many conflicting ideas. For example, there is a conflict over which acts should be punished, and over the proper apportionment of punishments. In a different arena, there is disagreement over whether people should be paid more for having natural talents, and whether taxes should be graduated, or issued at a flat rate. In fact, the only way to navigate among conflicting claims of justice is to look to the source of its authority, namely, social utility. This does not mean, however, that there is no difference between the just and the expedient, or that policy is more important than justice. Rather, justice grounded on utility is the chief part, and the most important part, of all morality; it concerns many of the most basic essentials for human well-being. Mill argues that the moral rules that forbid people to harm each other are more important than any rules of policy, rules about how societal affairs should be managed. Furthermore, the preservation of justice preserves peace among human beings. Thus, there is a very strong utility interest in preserving and enforcing justices dictates. Mill argues that most of the applications of justice we observe today are simply ways of maintaining the notion of moral rights just discussed. Impartiality is one rule that is partly based in these, but also comes from the very meaning of utility. The greatest happiness principle doesnt have meaning unless each persons happiness, supposed equal in degree, is valued exactly as much as somebody elses. People are seen to have an equal claim to happiness, and an equal claim to the means to happiness. Social inequalities that are not required by expediency are thus seen to be unjust. Mill closes by observing that justice is a name for some moral requirements, which are higher on the scale of utility, and thus more important, than any others. However, there can be cases in which some other social duty is so important that it overrules one of the general rules of justice. Thus, it could be acceptable to steal in order to save a life. Mill argues that the previous discussion has resolved what had been the only real problem with utilitarian theory. It has always been clear that cases of justice are also cases of expediency; the difference is that very different sentiments attach themselves to issues of justice and expeediency. Mill argues that he has accounted for what this feeling is; it is simply the natural feeling of resentment, moralized by being connected to social good. Justice is the name for certain social utilities that are more important than any other kind, and thus should be preserved by a feeling that is different in kind from others. It might be thought that utilitarianism supports the immediate withdrawal of American forces, but that isnt necessarily the case. Indeed, two aspects of utilitarian thought suggest that immediate withdrawal would be wrong. The first of these is the fact that utilitarianism is progressive. As opposed to concepts like Kantian thought, it takes no account of the past. In utilitarianism you deal with the situation you find yourself in. Even if the war in Iraq was wrong, by utilitarian standards, and even if its been badly managed by those same standards, its a separate question what ought to be done now, given the situation as we find it.  [18]  The second aspect is that utilitarianism sanctions negative responsibility. Bernard Williams defines this by saying, If I am ever responsible for anything, then I must be just as much responsible for things that I allow or fail to prevent, as I am for things that I myself, in the more everyday restricted sense, bring about.  [19]  This im plies that a person is responsible not only for what they do, but for what they allow also. With relation to the US occupation, if they withdraw their troops and the differing sects of Iraq, Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds etc, begin to kill each other en masse, as seems likely  [20]  , then from the viewpoint of a utilitarian, the US is responsible, as the deaths could have been prevented. The question utilitarians must answer is which action, available to the US, would maximise overall utility? According to utilitarianism, Americans count for no more than Iraqis.  [21]  Mill describes Bentham as saying Everybody to count for one, nobody for more than one.  [22]  It may be that every action available to the US results in death and suffering, and therefore pleasure doesnt seem an applicable notion; however the question is which action would result in the least deaths and the least suffering. Furthermore, act utilitarianism makes no distinction between the guilty and the innocent e.g. if breaking a promise does not weaken respect for the moral rule to keep promises (in which chaos would result and bad utility would be produced), then the act can be justified.  [23]  This is important because not many utilitarian supporters have spoken out about the Iraq war, and Burgess-Jackson speculates that it may be because it will make utilitarianism look bad  [24]   . He goes on to state that most Americans think American lives are worth more than Iraqi lives, i.e. patriotism. Most think that, all being equal, doing harm is worse than allowing harm. Also many think that what was done in the past is morally relevant to what we ought to do now. Finally, most Americans think that the interests of the innocent are more important than the interests of the guilty. From this spectrum you can see why utilitarianism would look unfavourable. ] Along with the Just War Theory, utilitarian ethics both claim moral correctness through the evaluation of consequences. Other ethicists though, originally Kant, contend that good intention is the true substance of moral certainty. This belief led Kant to propose an ethical system comprised of maxims called duty.  [25]  In this type of system a lie, even when committed under implications of good consequences, is always unethical. Applying Kantian ethics to war is more problematic than this, but in comparison to predicting outcomes it is far more one-dimensional. Kant, urges us to follow a maxim authorising violent action only when our own life is threatened, To preserve ones life is duty  [26]  . If then it was 100% proven that Weapons of Mass Destruction were present in Iraq, then the Kantian maxim for war is satisfied. At present though, it seems it is not. Ethical thinkers can therefore be roughly divided into two sections. First of all we think of those who deem whether an action is moral or immoral owing to the motive behind it. The second camp relates to those who decide whether or not an action is moral with regard to the consequences it manufactures. Kant is firmly in the former camp, making him a deontologist rather than a consequentialist when it comes to ethics. (Deontology stems from the Greek for duty, deon and logos i.e. science.)  [27]  Kant would argue that we are subject to moral judgment because we are able to consider and give reasons for our actions, and hence moral judgment should be directed at our reasons for acting. As has already been established, an extremely important figure in the field of utilitarianism is John Stuart Mill, whose essay we considered earlier. Born in 1806 in London, one of the most important philosophers and writers of the Victorian period, John Stuart Mill was a political activist, and was involved in efforts for social reform throughout his life. Mills father, James Mill, was also a famous philosopher and historian. In order to be properly trained and educated, Mill Senior believed that a childs mind was like a blank slate and must be subject to a strict regimen. Consequently, he isolated his son from children his own age and kept him under a rigorous schedule. He saw to it that by the age of three, Mill was learning Greek, and by the age of eight had become skilled in Latin. Mills day consisted of academic work, and he was granted only one hour of leisure each day. By the age of fourteen, he had studied profoundly in history, logic, mathematics, and economics. Mill began studying Jeremy Bentham at the age of fifteen, the fundamentalist English theorist and more importantly the founder of utilitarianism. The premise of utilitarianism initiated a lifelong quest for social reform.  [28]   In 1822, Mill began publishing and a year later he had helped form the Utilitarian Society, which convened at Benthams house. He recovered from a severe bout of depression in 1826, attributed his emotionally restricted childhood. After this Mill resumed an active academic life, but with an altered point of view. He now allowed for a human dimension in his thought that counterbalanced the futility of utilitarianism, emphasising an intellectual attitude to life at the expense of emotions. Even though Mill was influenced by utilitarianism, a theory that addresses individuals to work for the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people, he nonetheless worked to protect peoples rights, and in particular women. Mills concern for social reform had roots in his belief that the majority often denies liberty to the people, be it through moral judgments, social judgments, or indeed law.  [29]  The concept of individual autonomy reappears right the way through Mills work. He held th e belief that a person may do anything they wish, as long as that persons actions do not harm others. He upheld that governments have no right to interfere with an individuals affairs, even when they use laws that are intended to be beneficial to the individual in question. In effect, the only feasible grounds for any government to exist in the first place is to protect the individual so that he or she experiences defence in times of war, security in peacetime, and safety from deception.  [30]   With regards to the War on Iraq then, you can compare the war to the points raised by Mill. He held that a person could do what they liked, as long as it didnt harm others. Obviously the war in Iraq has harmed countless people in one way or another so this is a violation of liberty. Mill proposed that governments have no right to interfere with an individuals affairs, even when the law is intended to be helpful. Arguably, when you look at the contradictory evidence now at our disposal, Iraq was posing no threat to America or the UK. Hence if we look at Iraq as an individual, then the US government and their allies were interfering with their affairs, even though it was meant to be beneficial, i.e. disposing of Saddam Hussein. Things got so bad in Iraq that people started saying they were better off under Saddam, so for some Iraqi civilians, the interference was completely unnecessary. This is not to say that they had a good life under the dictator, just that it was the better of two evils.  [31]  Furthermore, Mill went on to stress that the only grounds for government to exist is so that the individual, in this case America, would experience safety from deception, security in times of war and also in times of peace. You could argue that all three of these criterions havent been met and hence the Iraq war violates individuals rights as well as being an unjust war. Daniel Pipes raises some great points in his book, Militant Islam Reaches America with the chapter Who is the enemy? The first section of the chapter is entitled, Vagueness and Euphemism. He speaks of the first few weeks after the 9/11 attacks, when Bush would not explicitly name his enemies. He insisted they were neither Afghans nor even Muslims but rather people, as I have noted earlier, whom he called evildoers or the evil ones.  [32]  The chapter is based on the original invasion of Afghanistan, but everything that Pipes says rings true for the war on Iraq also. When Bush announced that military action was being initiated, he defined the goal as the disruption and defeat of the global terror network. Pipes again questions what this means, global terror network is applicable assuming that the global network is not exclusively Al-Qaeda to militant Islamic groups such as Hizbullah and Hamas, the IRA and the Tamil Tigers. Most interestingly however, the last group that Pipes ca tegorises in the potential global terror network is States like Iraq?  [33]  The book was published before the actual invasion of Iraq yet Pipes predicted it, all down to Bushs (arguably clever) vagueness when thinking of a tag for the enemies of the United States. Still no one really knows the real reason Iraq was invaded, and hence for critics of the war such the oil sceptics Pipes argument shows a very interesting argument. Bushs deliberate vagueness meant that in effect, he could do whatever he liked to an enemy state, because the threat of evildoers continuing to try and harm America and Americans  [34]  didnt limit his options to a specific adversary and as long as he could claim some sort of threat, i.e. weapons of mass destruction, then in his mind he could justify America going on the offensive. In conclusion there are many topics in history that we can look at with regard to utilitarianism and war, which show surprising similarities with the Iraq war this essay was

Hiroshima: Book Report :: essays research papers

Hiroshima: Book Report ISSUES Briefly describe the issues that are dealt with in the book. This book was vary informative to me. This book mainly talked about the affects of nuclear weapons. On August 6, 1945, Hiroshima was destroyed by the first atom bomb ever dropped on a city. It speaks about how even if you did survive the blast you were so badly injured that you would die soon anyway. It talked about an incident where someone's eye was melting and was oozing down his face. It speaks about how houses were lifted of there foundation. After all the research about the bomb was made, they reported that 78,150 people had been killed, 13,983 were missing, and 37,425 had been injured. Even before the bomb, the citizens of Hiroshima were waken almost every night because of false warnings of intruder planes coming in the area. It talked about how a lot of people had to go on living with only one leg or one arm. To me, it brought up a good point, that all those innocent people had do die for nothing. CHAPTER SUMMARY Briefly summarize each of the chapters: main ideas, narrative features. The first chapter is called "A Noiseless Flash." The title kind of speaks for it self. That was exactly how the bomb was. No one saw anything or heard anything but a flash. The first chapter speaks about how people are wondering why they are alive, but their next door neighbors aren't. It was weird, there could be a house right in the middle of two houses; the one in the middle survived the bomb but the other two did not. A whole neighborhood could be wiped out except for a few houses. Why those houses did not get knocked down, no one knows. The second chapter is called "The Fire." This chapter is about how the explosion caused many fires. The fires were spread everywhere because of the high winds. Many of the people were burned and buried in the smashed up bricks and ashes. The ones that survived the bomb and fire, were seriously hurt. The book pointed out an incident where someone's eye was melting and oozing down his check. The third chapter was called "Details Are Being Investigated." In the radio, it had been said that Hiroshima suffered of an attack by a few B-29. Many people are being treated for their burns and injuries. Many have died and a lot more at this time are missing. Everyone is still in shock after 2 days that the bomb struck. The forth chapter is called "Panic Grass And Feverfew.

Vampire Academy Chapter 10

TEN â€Å"EXCUSE ME, MR. NAGY? I CANT really concentrate with Lissa and Rose passing notes over there.† Mia was attempting to distract attention from herself – as well as from her inability to answer Mr. Nagy's question – and it was ruining what had otherwise been a promising day. A few of the fox rumors still circulated, but most people wanted to talk about Christian attacking Ralf. I still hadn't cleared Christian of the fox incident – I was pretty sure he was psycho enough to have done it as some crazy sign of affection for Lissa – but whatever his motives, he had shifted the attention off her, just as he'd said. Mr. Nagy legendary for his ability to humiliate students by reading notes aloud, homed in on us like a missile. He snatched the note away, and the excited class settled in for a full reading. I swallowed my groan, trying to look as blank and unconcerned as possible. Beside me, Lissa looked like she wanted to die. â€Å"My, my,† he said, looking the note over. â€Å"If only students would write this much in their essays. One of you has considerably worse writing than the other, so forgive me if I get anything wrong here.† He cleared his throat. † ? ®So, I saw J last night,' begins the person with bad handwriting, to which the response is, ? ®What happened,' followed by no fewer than five question marks. Understandable, since sometimes one – let alone four – just won't get the point across, eh?† The class laughed, and I noticed Mia throwing me a particularly mean smile. â€Å"The first speaker responds: ? ®What do you think happened? We hooked up in one of the empty lounges.' â€Å" Mr. Nagy glanced up after hearing some more giggles in the room. His British accent only added to the hilarity. â€Å"May I assume by this reaction that the use of ? ®hook up' pertains to the more recent, shall we say, carnal application of the term than the tamer one I grew up with?† More snickers ensued. Straightening up, I said boldly, â€Å"Yes, sir, Mr. Nagy. That would be correct, sir.† A number of people in the class laughed outright. â€Å"Thank you for that confirmation, Miss Hathaway. Now, where was I? Ah yes, the other speaker then asks, ? ®How was it?' The response is, ? ®Good,' punctuated with a smiley face to confirm said adjective. Well. I suppose kudos are in order for the mysterious J, hmmm? ? ®So, like, how far did you guys go?' Uh, ladies,† said Mr. Nagy, â€Å"I do hope this doesn't surpass a PG rating. ? ®Not very. We got caught.' And again, we are shown the severity of the situation, this time through the use of a not-smiling face. ? ®What happened?' ? ®Dimitri showed up. He threw Jesse out and then bitched me out.' â€Å" The class lost it, both from hearing Mr. Nagy say â€Å"bitched† and from finally getting some participants named. â€Å"Why, Mr. Zeklos, are you the aforementioned J? The one who earned a smiley face from the sloppy writer?† Jesse's face turned beet red, but he didn't look entirely displeased at having his exploits made known in front of his friends. He'd kept what had happened a secret thus far – including the blood talk – because I suspected Dimitri had scared the hell out of him. â€Å"Well, while I applaud a good misadventure as much as the next teacher whose time is utterly wasted, do remind your ? ®friends' in the future that my class is not a chat room.† He tossed the paper back on to Lissa's desk. â€Å"Miss Hathaway, it seems there's no feasible way to punish you, since you're already maxed out on penalties around here. Ergo, you, Miss Dragomir, will serve two detentions instead of one on behalf of your friend. Stay here when the bell rings, please.† After class, Jesse found me, an uneasy look on his face. â€Å"Hey, um, about that note†¦you know I didn't have anything to do with that. If Belikov finds out about it†¦you'll tell him? I mean, you'll let him know I didn't – â€Å" â€Å"Yeah, yeah,† I interrupted him. â€Å"Don't worry, you're safe.† Standing with me, Lissa watched him walk out of the room. Thinking of how easily Dimitri had thrown him around – and of his apparent cowardice – I couldn't help but remark, â€Å"You know, Jesse's suddenly not as hot as I used to think.† She only laughed. â€Å"You'd better go. I've got desks to wash.† I left her, heading back for my dorm. As I did, I passed a number of students gathered in small clusters outside the building. I regarded them wistfully, wishing I had the free time to socialize. â€Å"No, it's true,† I heard a confident voice say. Camille Conta. Beautiful and popular, from one of the most prestigious families in the Conta clan. She and Lissa had sort of been friends before we left, in the uneasy way two powerful forces keep an eye on each other. â€Å"They, like, clean toilets or something.† â€Å"Oh my God,† her friend said. â€Å"I'd die if I was Mia.† I smiled. Apparently Jesse had spread some of the stories I'd told him last night. Unfortunately, the next overheard conversation shattered my victory. † – heard it was still alive. Like, twitching on her bed.† â€Å"That is so gross. Why would they just leave it there?† â€Å"I don't know. Why kill it in the first place?† â€Å"You think Ralf was right? That she and Rose did it to get kicked – â€Å" They saw me and shut up. Scowling, I skulked off across the quadrangle. Still alive, still alive. I'd refused to let Lissa talk about the similarities between the fox and what had happened two years ago. I didn't want to believe they were connected, and I certainly didn't want her to either. But I hadn't been able to stop thinking about that incident, not only because it was chilling, but because it really did remind me of what had just happened in her room. We had been out in the woods near campus one evening, having skipped out on our last class. I'd traded a pair of cute, rhinestone-studded sandals to Abby Badica for a bottle of peach schnapps – desperate, yes, but you did what you had to in Montana – which she'd somehow gotten hold of. Lissa had shaken her head in disapproval when I suggested cutting class to go put the bottle out of its misery, but she'd come along anyway. Like always. We found an old log to sit on near a scummy green marsh. A half-moon cast a tiny sliver of light on us, but it was more than enough for vampires and half-vampires to see by. Passing the bottle back and forth, I grilled her on Aaron. She'd fessed up that the two of them had had sex the weekend before, and I felt a surge of jealousy that she'd been the one to have sex first. â€Å"So what was it like?† She shrugged and took another drink. â€Å"I don't know. It wasn't anything.† â€Å"What do you mean it wasn't anything? Didn't the earth move or the planets align or something?† â€Å"No,† she said, smothering a laugh. â€Å"Of course not.† I didn't really get why that should be funny, but I could tell she didn't want to talk about it. This was around the time the bond had begun forming, and her emotions were starting to creep into me now and then. I held up the bottle and glared at it. â€Å"I don't think this stuff is working.† â€Å"That's because there's barely any alcohol in – â€Å" The sound of something moving in the brush came from nearby. I immediately shot up, putting my body between her and the noise. â€Å"It's some animal,† she said when a minute went by in silence. That didn't mean it wasn't dangerous. The school's wards kept out Strigoi, but wild animals often wandered into the outskirts of campus, posing their own threats. Bears. Cougars. â€Å"Come on,† I told her. â€Å"Let's head back.† We hadn't gone very far when I heard something moving again, and someone stepped out into our path. â€Å"Ladies.† Ms. Karp. We froze, and whatever quick reactions I'd shown back by the marsh disappeared as I delayed a few moments in hiding the bottle behind my back. A half-smile crossed her face, and she held out her hand. Sheepishly, I gave the bottle to her, and she tucked it under her arm. She turned without another word, and we followed, knowing there would be consequences to deal with. â€Å"You think no one notices when half a class is gone?† she asked after a little while. â€Å"Half a class?† â€Å"A few of you apparently chose today to skip. Must be the nice weather. Spring fever.† Lissa and I trudged along. I'd never been comfortable around Ms. Karp since the time she'd healed my hands. Her weird, paranoid behavior had taken on a strange quality to me – a lot stranger than before. Scary, even. And lately I couldn't look at her without seeing those marks by her forehead. Her deep red hair usually covered them but not always. Sometimes there were new marks; sometimes the old ones faded to nothing. A weird fluttering noise sounded to my right. We all stopped. â€Å"One of your classmates, I imagine,† murmured Ms. Karp, turning toward the sound. But when we reached the spot, we found a large black bird lying on the on the ground. Birds – and most animals – didn't do anything for me, but even I had to admire its sleek feathers and fierce beak. It could probably peck someone's eyes out in thirty seconds – if it weren't obviously dying. With a last, halfhearted shake, the bird finally went still. â€Å"What is that? Is it a crow?† I asked. â€Å"Too big,† said Ms. Karp. â€Å"It's a raven.† â€Å"Is it dead?† asked Lissa. I peered at it. â€Å"Yeah. Definitely dead. Don't touch it.† â€Å"Probably attacked by another bird,† observed Ms. Karp. â€Å"They fight over territory and resources sometimes.† Lissa knelt down, compassion on her face. I wasn't surprised, since she'd always had a thing for animals. She'd lectured me for days after I'd instigated the infamous hamster-and-hermit-crab fight. I'd viewed the fight as a testing of worthy opponents. She'd seen it as animal cruelty. Transfixed, she reached toward the raven. â€Å"Liss!† I exclaimed, horrified. â€Å"It's probably got a disease.† But her hand moved out like she hadn't even heard me. Ms. Karp stood there like a statue, her white face looking like a ghost's. Lissa's fingers stroked the raven's wings. â€Å"Liss,† I repeated, starting to move toward her, to pull her back. Suddenly, a strange sensation flooded through my head, a sweetness that was beautiful and full of life. The feeling was so intense, it stopped me in my tracks. Then the raven moved. Lissa gave a small scream and snatched her hand back. We both stared wide-eyed. The raven flapped its wings, slowly trying to right itself and stand up. When it managed to do so, it turned toward us, fixing Lissa with a look that seemed too intelligent for a bird, its eyes held hers, and I couldn't read her reaction through the bond. At long last, the raven broke the gaze and lifted into the air, strong wings carrying it away. Wind stirring the leaves was the only sound left. â€Å"Oh my God,† breathed Lissa. â€Å"What just happened?† â€Å"Hell if I know,† I said, hiding my stark terror. Ms. Karp strode forward and grabbed Lissa's arm, forcefully turning her so that they faced each other. I was there in a flash, ready to take action if Crazy Karp tried anything, though even I had qualms about taking down a teacher. â€Å"Nothing happened,† said Ms. Karp in an urgent voice, her eyes wild-looking. â€Å"Do you hear me? Nothing. And you can't tell anyone – anyone – about what you saw. Both of you. Promise me. Promise me you won't ever talk about this again.† Lissa and I exchanged uneasy glances. â€Å"Okay† she croaked out. Ms. Karp's grip relaxed a little. â€Å"And don't ever do it again. If you do, they'll find out. They'll try to find you.† She turned to me. â€Å"You can't let her do it. Not ever again.† On the quad, outside my dorm, someone was saying my name. â€Å"Hey, Rose? I've called you, like, a hundred times.† I forgot about Ms. Karp and the raven and glanced over at Mason, who had apparently started walking with me toward the dorm while I was off in la-la land. â€Å"Sorry,† I mumbled. â€Å"I'm out of it. Just†¦um, tired.† â€Å"Too much excitement last night?† I gave him a narrow-eyed look. â€Å"Nothing I couldn't handle.† â€Å"I guess,† he laughed, though he didn't exactly sound amused. â€Å"Sounds like Jesse couldn't handle it.† â€Å"He did okay.† â€Å"If you say so. But personally, I think you've got bad taste.† I stopped walking. â€Å"And I don't think it's any of your business.† He looked away angrily. â€Å"You made it the whole class's business.† â€Å"Hey, I didn't do that on purpose.† â€Å"Would've happened anyway. Jesse's got a big mouth.† â€Å"He wouldn't have told.† â€Å"Yeah,† said Mason. â€Å"Because he's so cute and has such an important family.† â€Å"Stop being an idiot,† I snapped. â€Å"And why do you even care? Jealous I'm not doing it with you?† His flush grew, going all the way to the roots of his red hair. â€Å"I just don't like hearing people talk shit about you, that's all. There are a lot of nasty jokes going around. They're calling you a slut.† â€Å"I don't care what they call me.† â€Å"Oh, yeah. You're really tough. You don't need anyone.† I stopped. â€Å"I don't. I'm one of the best novices in this fucking place. I don't need you acting all gallant and coming to my defense. Don't treat me like I'm some helpless girl.† I turned around and kept walking, but he caught up to me easily. The woes of being five-seven. â€Å"Look†¦I didn't mean to upset you. I'm just worried about you.† I gave a harsh laugh. â€Å"I'm serious. Wait†¦Ã¢â‚¬  he began. â€Å"I, uh, did something for you. Sort of. I went to the library last night and tried to look up St. Vladimir,† I stopped again. â€Å"You did?† â€Å"Yeah, but there wasn't much on Anna. All the books were kind of generic. Just talked about him healing people, bringing them back from the edge of death.† That last part hit a nerve. â€Å"Was†¦was there anything else?† I stammered. He shook his head. â€Å"No. You probably need some primary sources, but we don't have any here.† â€Å"Primary what?† He scoffed, a smile breaking over his face. â€Å"Do you do anything but pass notes? We just talked about them the other day in Andrews' class. They're books from the actual time period you want to study. Secondary ones are written by people living today. You'll get better information if you find something written by the guy himself. Or someone who actually knew him.† â€Å"Huh. Okay. What are you, like, a boy genius now?† Mason gave me a light punch in the arm. â€Å"I pay attention, that's all. You're so oblivious. You miss all sorts of things.† He smiled nervously. â€Å"And look†¦I really am sorry about what I said. I was just – â€Å" Jealous, I realized. I could see it in his eyes. How had I never noticed this before? He was crazy about me. I guess I really was oblivious. â€Å"It's all right, Mase. Forget about it.† I smiled. â€Å"And thanks for looking that stuff up.† He smiled back, and I went inside, sad that I didn't feel the same way about him.

The History and Development of Psychology essays

The History and Development of Psychology essays Psychology has evolved through the years as the face of society and culture has changed. As the worlds population grows so do the boundaries by which the science of psychology is growing. It is an adventure of the mind that compels one to want to study the human psyche. These studies have produced thousands of publications over the past three hundred years. Many of which we can still find in publication today. Not only are some of the literary works still in publication, but also many of the theories have remained without much change. We have entered into a world of experimentation. One that allows us to research and study animal behaviors. These experiments are regulated, however, there are many different opinions as to how they should be regulated and if they are enough. Who determines these regulations? It must be up to the scholars, leaders and our society. Without studies, advancements would not be found. Where do these psychologist go? You see them in many forms. In the early days, they were educators of psychology, scientists and researchers. Now, they are clinical psychologists, school psychologists, and industrial psychologists and yes, many are still educators, scientists and researchers. Their work is tireless, valued and tested each day. Some areas have broadened and opened up the eyes of many young scholars. Where is psychology going? We can only assume with the psychology of yesterday and today that we will delve into a new realm of the psychological world. It is one of great interest. Not all can understand this interest but many are intrigued by psychology. ...

How Much Air Force One Cost

How Much Air Force One Cost Air Force One, the aircraft that transports the president of the United States, cost  about $2 billion to build and more than $200,000 to fly, according to federal spending records and published reports. Taxpayers pay for some or all of the Air Force One cost regardless of whether the presidents airplane is used for official trips or unofficial, political purposes. The two newest Air Force One airplanes, both models  747-8, are being outfitted by Boeing at a combined cost of about $3.9 billion and were to take flight in 2021. The White House determines whether use of Air Force One is for official or political purposes. Many times the Boeing 747 is used for a combination of events. Specific Air Force One Costs The $200,000-plus hourly Air Force One cost covers everything from fuel, maintenance, engineering support, food and lodging for the pilots and crew and other operational costs that include the use of special communications equipment. In addition to the hourly cost of Air Force One, taxpayers cover salaries for Secret Service staff and other assistants who travel with the president. Occasionally, when there are more than 75 people traveling with the president, the federal government will use a second passenger airplane to accommodate them. What is an Official Trip? Perhaps the most common example of official Air Force One use by the president is traveling across the United States to explain and win support for his administrations policies. Another is traveling overseas on official state business to meet with foreign leaders, such as President Barack Obamas 2010 trip on Air Force One to India. When a president travels on official business, taxpayers cover all Air Force One costs including food, lodging and car rentals, according to the Congressional Research Service. During official trips taxpayers also cover the cost of travel for the presidents immediate family and staff. What is a Political Trip? The most common example of a political trip on Air Force One is when the president travels to a destination in his role not as commander-in-chief but as de facto leader of his political party. Such travel would be to attend fundraisers, campaign rallies or party events. On the campaign trail, Obama and other presidential nominees have also gotten to use armored buses that cost more than $1 million each. When Air Force One is used for political purposes, the president often reimburses the government for the cost of food, lodging and travel. The president or his election campaign pays back an amount that is equivalent of the airfare that they would have paid had they used a commercial airline, according to the Congressional Research Service. According to The Associated Press, though, the president or his campaign does not pay for the entire Air Force One operation cost. They pays an amount that is based on the number of people board the airplane. Taxpayers still pick up the cost of Secret Service agents and the operation of Air Force One. Political and Officials Trips The a president and his family and staff travel on Air Force One for a combination of political and officials purposes, they typically reimburse taxpayers for the part of the trip that is considered campaigning. For example, if half of the presidents trip is spent raising money for his or another officials election, he or his campaign will reimburse taxpayers for half the cost of his travel, food and lodging. There are gray areas, of course. When they travel and appear in public to defend their policy positions, the difference between their official duties and their activities as leaders of their political party can be difficult to assess, the Congressional Research Service state. As a result, the White House decides the nature of travel on a case-by-case basis, attempting to determine whether each trip, or part of a trip, is or is not official by considering the nature of the event involved, and the role of the individual involved.

The Growth of Technology and Humanity Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

The Growth of Technology and Humanity - Essay Example For instance, when placed in juxtaposition with Ong’s consideration of writing as technology (p. 21), it could be considered in a sense that indeed, technology exceeds our humanity. Printed materials portray differing ideas of educated people which would be much appreciated have they been healthy but the sad thing is, papers also serve as battle fields. Words are exchanged in papers that infuriate authors, pens are used to destroy other people and make libelous claims. Television is also used as a means for this purpose where lawyers talk against their fellow lawyers, for instance if only to show who is more intelligent, politicians destroy each other with their words over radios, TV and the internet and the desire for fame and glory overthrows one’s education and sensibility. Speaking of arguments in written form, sometimes they are unintentional and are not directly written to be argumentative rather informative however would present problems to the reader when the su bject matter portray conflicting accounts as was encountered by Tompkins. In her search for the history of Indian Americans, she read different authors which consequently placed her in a quandary. This is usually what happens to audiences of what was mentioned earlier, in the case of arguments presented in the media whether written or through television or internet. On the other side, technology also informs and encourages people to be observant, critical and ever watchful. In the case of the aforementioned writer, her quandary brought her to an in-depth study of the written words of the authors she read which eventually gave her a deeper understanding of their narrations and the differences in their accounts which allowed her to be more open minded. This could prove Ong’s philosophy that technologies are not mere exterior aids but also interior where there is a transformation of consciousness that occurs (25). In a person’s search for truth with the various informatio n that technology brings, when one is vigilant enough to use technology to his advantage, as it may be separate from a person, yet one cannot deny the fact that it affects one’s decisions and reactions. Had Tompkins simply choose to believe the author of her preference, the one whose views was to her liking, there would not have been a growing experience that she encountered in the process. An illumination about a problem occurred, about a problem which she thought was solved long ago but without the reading materials, without technology, she would have never discovered that her problems were not answered after all but were simply hidden. Technology has always been a part of human beings and it probably will increase in its use as people depend on it more and more. This brings the fear that whatever humaneness was left during the time of Einstein might be lost forever with the rapid improvements made on technologies. If televisions were appreciated only when one got home to s it in the living room to enjoy it, now, one could watch movies anywhere and anytime. Laptops and notebooks now come handy and they bring more than what the television offers so that more time is spent on it as compared to the time spent in front of the television. Cellphones are now affordable that even children have access to such machines, engaging them with activities that add to the information they learn in school. However, when one looks around, could there be any

Summary of On Racist Speech Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Summary of On Racist Speech - Essay Example Unfortunately universities have not been able to provide black and other minority students the protection which the Constitution guarantees them. Racism or racist speech is only tackled when it takes the form of face to face harassment or assaulting speech or acts on an individual or small group of persons. The Supreme Court has held that words which " by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" are not protected by the First Amendment. Blacks and minorities have to be given recourse to the same education, facilities and security all over the campus from every form of racism, harassment, pain, injury and suffering. Against the backdrop of democracy, we should be sure to strike a balance with our concern, for free flow of ideas and the democratic process dependent on that flow and our desire to further the cause of equality. We have to recognize the fact that racial speech inflicts real harm and then with an equal commitment to equality and free speech can we come to some reconciliation. Debating and arguing we risk making the First Amendment an instrument of domination rather than a vehicle of liberation. Courts have, for example, exempted from the protection of the First Amendment obscene speech, speech that disseminates, official secrets, that defames or libels another person, or that is used to form