Wednesday, July 31, 2019
Environmental pollution is the biggest menace to the human race on this planet today. It means adding impurity to environment. The environment consists of earth, water, air, plants and animals. If we pollute them, then the existence of man and nature will be hampered. It is true that trees are being cut down rapidly. Our earth is becoming warmer. If pollution continues, the day is not far when our earth will be a boiling pan and become a desert. Or it will be covered with sea water causing destruction of mankind. Pure air is always needed for inhaling. If we take pure air, our health improves. On the other hand impure air causes diseases and impairs our health and causes our death. Smoke pollutes the air. It is the root of air pollution. The smoke which is discharged from industries, automobiles and kitchens is the mixture of carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, methane etc. These are all poisonous gases. These cause lung-cancer, tuberculosis etc. which take a heavy toll of life. The glaring incident is the Bhopal gas leak in December 1984. Thousands of the residents of Bhopal died due to lungs problem which was caused by methylamine gas from the Union Carbide Plant. The garbage emitting foul smell, the decaying plants and animals also cause air pollution. Hence the doctors advise the patients having lungs trouble to settle in some rural places because the air of villages is pure and free from population. Then comes sound pollution. The harsh sounds of buses, its, mopeds etc. affect our power of hearing and causes fart trouble. It has been reported that there are two villages named Biraspalli and Devadas Palli near Dum Dum airport m Calcutta where a large number of people have lost their power of hearing. This is because of the frequent sounds of planes coming in and going out of Dum Dum Airport. The evils of sound pollution can be imagined from this example. The water of rivers and seas is being constantly polluted all over the world by various dangerous chemical and biological wastes. Mills and factories discharge very harmful waste waters into many rivers and sea. The water of the Ganges flowing by the side of both Varanashi and Calcutta is extremely polluted and contains all sorts of dangerous bacteria. It is really very strange and laughable that large number of the Indians regard this water as holy. They even drink this water for salvation. There is no doubt that the fish that grow in such waters are poisonous too. Reckless application of chemical fertilizers, insecticides and pesticides pollutes the soil. Vegetables and fruits are quite injurious today, because they contain the poison of insecticides and pesticides. If the air we breathe, the water we drink and the soil which produces our crops, vegetables and fruits, all become more and more impure, then our chances of good health and longevity will be very less and less. Environment pollution is a serious menace to our existence. Realising the danger, we must plant trees in large number to absorb impure air. Impure water from industries can be sent back for purification and then it can be used for irrigation purpose. Our government is well aware of the fact and is taking steps to save environment from pollution. We have also I minister to look after the environment.
Posted by Unknown at 7:50 PM
Tuesday, July 30, 2019
Perhaps the most notable obstacle that Greenpeace International faced during the course of its existence as an environmental activist organization is the time when the Rainbow Warrior was struck down by two underwater mines. The incident led to the discovery of the involvement of the French Government through its network of spies overseas. Eventually, the ordeal became a high-profile case that involved international bodies which also took its toll on Greenpeace International. Not only did the organization had to face the need to finance a replacement for Rainbow Warrior, they also had to take more caution in ensuring the safety of their personnel despite intimidations and threats to life and property (20th Anniversary of the Bombing of the Rainbow Warrior, 2005). The bombing of Rainbow Warrior became a precedent for Greenpeace International to further strive to achieve its goals of promoting the welfare of the environment for the benefit of humanity. The organization is currently facing the challenge of proving the innocence of Greenpeace Japan Campaigns Director Junichi Sato together with Toru Suzuki before the theft charges filed against them. If proven guilty, both accused members of the organization may face jail time for a maximum of ten years. In the long run, the possibility of having a decision unfavorable to the interests of the organization may eventually adversely affect the safety of the whales situated in the marine waters of Japan. On the other hand, the case, if the accused individuals are proven innocent beyond reasonable doubt, can serve as a future deterrent to whaling expeditions in Japan guised under the rug of scientific research. Embezzlement of whale meat may no soon become a footnote to written history as far as the environmental concerns in Japan go (Justice for the Tokyo Two Ã¢â¬â Justice for Whales, Coming Our Way? 2009). There are a few more obstacles that the organization is currently facing and has dealt with in the past. For the most part, none of these obstacles have struck down the efforts of the group. Despite the growing number of people hurling both legal and extra-legal impediments to the activities of Greenpeace International, it remains fervent in its aim to protect the natural environment. (2) Social justice is a very broad concept and, therefore, it should encompass all possible aspects of the society. Part of its concerns should be the protection of the natural environment. Environmental protectionism ought to be a major concern especially today since the erosion of the natural environment across continents has direly affected the lives of countless people. With a huge number of the global population dependent on the resources taken from the environment, it is easy to understand why the imperative to protect it is urgent and called for. A society existing under the helm of justice is secure insofar as its continued survival is concerned. Depriving the environment of the rightful protection it deserves diminishes the available source of natural wealth for the people. In the end, the lack of concrete protective measures for the environment can lead to the collapse not only of the environment but also of the entire human civilization (Kuzmiak, 1991). The premise is simple: we cannot live without the ample resources provided by nature. To neglect the need to protect the environment is to neglect the welfare of our generation and the generations that will soon follow. Similarly, to destroy it is to destroy our own lives and our hopes for a world devoid of the hazards of the hustle and bustle in the ever expanding concrete jungles of cities. (3) Environmental protectionism is necessary in achieving social justice because the environment is the foundation of everything else that we know of in this planet. The absence of such protective measures, no matter how radical they may stand in contrast to the status quo, will certainly reduce our chances of surviving as a race. The social perception of Greenpeace International is the idea that there is an urgent need to actively promote and protect the environment amidst the different social forces that seek to use environmental resources to great lengths without even giving sufficient room for environmental concerns. People should actively engage themselves in efforts to curb the disintegration of the natural environment as a direct result of human factors. Human beings alone have the power to effect change in their natural surroundings especially when taken in the context of the use and abuse of the environment by several public and private entities. Protecting the environment can go to great lengths especially in the form of directly meddling with the private activities of private groups, to the point of causing harm, financial or physical, to those who are at the wrong side of the fence. The political perception of the organization is the idea that governments should prioritize environmental concerns. For instance, the organization has recently called upon United States President Barack Obama to reassess the so-called bogus climate bill released in Congress (Democrats Pass Bogus Climate Bill, 2009). It serves as a concrete example of the political pressure being exerted by the organization on the upper branches of the government. With that in mind, it is easy to understand that the organization very well considers political avenues in meeting their goals to protect the environment. With the growing environmental concerns throughout the years of the organizationÃ¢â¬â¢s existence, it is apparent that the organization itself has dramatically changed through time. For the most part, the organization has grown more active than what it used to be in the later parts of the twentieth century. Moreover, the organization has become more actively involved in directly meddling with the activities of individuals and groups which they see as threats to the environment. (4) There are several previous actions of Greenpeace International which have been politically adapted. For example, the supporters of the organization heeded the call to write to their Representatives in Congress and inform them of the peopleÃ¢â¬â¢s clamor for safer toys for children up to 12 years of age. Eventually, the US Congress passed a law that will ban childrenÃ¢â¬â¢s products that contain the toxic chemical Ã¢â¬Å"phthalatesÃ¢â¬ (US Congress Announces Ban on Toxic Chemicals, 2008). Another example is the organizationÃ¢â¬â¢s victory during the early parts of the 1970s, especially the cases of protesting US nuclear testing at Amchitka Island in Alaska and FranceÃ¢â¬â¢s efforts to do atmospheric tests of their weapons somewhere in the regions of the South Pacific. In December 2007, the Irish government listened to the call of the organization to end the use of incandescent light bulbs and acted accordingly; the government announced its move to ban the use and production of incandescent light bulbs in Ireland which became the first country to do so among the European Union members (Greenpeace Victories, 2008). The latter example is a turning-point in history precisely because it marks the initial departure from the long-standing practice of using light bulbs on a massive scale that are not friendly to the environment. These examples, among others, present the idea that Greenpeace International has been successful in some of its efforts to protect the environment. Several laws were passed in favor of the environmental concerns of the organization. Also, several protests resulted to drastic changes in the activities of sovereign governments. References 20th Anniversary of the Bombing of the Rainbow Warrior. (2005). Retrieved May 25, 2009, from http://www. greenpeace. org/international/press/releases/20th-anniversary-of-the-bombin Democrats Pass Bogus Climate Bill. (2009). Retrieved May 24, 2009, from http://www. greenpeace. org/international/news/waxmanbill-180509 Greenpeace Victories. (2008). Retrieved May 25, 2009, from http://www. greenpeace. org/international/about/victories Justice for the Tokyo Two Ã¢â¬â Justice for Whales, Coming Our Way? (2009). Retrieved May 25, 2009, from http://www. greenpeace. org/international/news/justice-for-the-tokyo-two-ju Kuzmiak, D. T. (1991). The American Environmental Movement. The Geographical Journal, 157(3), 265-278. US Congress Announces Ban on Toxic Chemicals. (2008). Retrieved May 25, 2009, from http://www. greenpeace. org/international/news/congress-announces-ban-on-toxi
Posted by Unknown at 11:20 PM
Compare and contrast the philosophical contributions Nietzsche and Mill make to our understanding of political and social tyranny. Both philosophers, Nietzsche and Mill make contrasting and similar contributions to our understanding of the two terms. I intend explore how each philosopher does this and the differences and similarities between their two philosophies. Before comparing and contrasting the contributions of both Nietzsche and Mill to our understanding of political and social tyranny, it is important to define exactly what these terms mean, and to distinguish between the two. Political tyranny on the one hand is the imposition of positive liberty by a tyrant to an individual or a collective group of individuals. That is, a situation where a certain way of life is dictated to citizens through the presence of obstacles, barriers or constraints. If we lived in a politically tyrannical society, we would be living under the control of a dictator, ruled by a single governing body. Furthermore, the pressure for an individual to conform to these Ã¢â¬Å"rulesÃ¢â¬ can be seen as a result of ones fear of public disapproval Ã¢â¬â a recognised form of social tyranny. Philosopher John Stewart Mill, rigorously educated by his philosopher father James Mill, began making contributions to politics and philosophy from the early 1830s, when he wrote profusely on such political and philosophical matters. He was greatly influenced by the works of Jeremy Bentham and his interested in Utilitarianism. MillÃ¢â¬â¢s book, Ã¢â¬Å"On LibertyÃ¢â¬ published in 1859 and written with his wife, saw Mill move away from the Utilitarian notion that individual liberty was necessary for economic and government efficiency and advanced the classical defence of individual freedom as a value in itself. It advocated moral and economic freedom of individuals from the state. His basic argument is simple: liberty from political and social tyranny is good because it allows for new and improved ideas to evolve and good because liberty forever puts old ideas to the test. Ã¢â¬â His ideas were and still are enormously influential and the ideas presented remain the basis of much political thought. In Ã¢â¬Å"On LibertyÃ¢â¬ Mill refers to tyrannical societies of the past where liberty meant protection from the tyranny of political rulers. They consisted of a governing One or a governing tribe, who derived their authority from inheritance or conquest. (NZ) To prevent the weaker members of society from being preyed upon by Ã¢â¬Å"innumerable vulturesÃ¢â¬ it was thought that there should be an Ã¢â¬Å"animal of preyÃ¢â¬ stronger than the rest. Ã¢â¬â The aim being to set limits to the power of the tyrant. With this came a time where, as human affairs progressed, what was wanted was that rulers should be identified with the people, and that their interests should be the interests of the whole nation. This, Mill refers to as Ã¢â¬Å"the tyranny of the majorityÃ¢â¬ which was held in Ã¢â¬Å"dreadÃ¢â¬ (and commonly still is.) At this point, Mill is suggesting that majority rule itself could become a tyranny and that the suppression of minorities by the majority should be taken as a serious threat to a fair and just society. Mill claims that Ã¢â¬Å"society as a whole can issue wrong mandates and practice a tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression.Ã¢â¬ He argues therefore that protection against political tyranny is not enough: there also needs to be protection from social tyranny or Ã¢â¬Å"the tyranny of prevailing opinionÃ¢â¬ the latter being harder to achieve protection from. Mill saw that this kind of political tyranny could prevent the development of individualistic behavior. Such tyrannies could work in two ways: through the adoption of laws which operate against idiosyncratic, non conforming or dissenting individuals. Or, through the power or pressure of public opinion, (which is notoriously prone to error, superstition or tradition.) Hence Mill argued that public opinion should not be a law that everyone should conform to, and that the individual should have protection of the law against the prevailing sentiments of society. Ã¢â¬â Essentially, we each need freedom to develop our individuality. So for Mill, the central problem is therefore to establish the legitimate extent to which the state can interfere in the affairs of individuals whilst maintaining acceptable levels of individuality. MillÃ¢â¬â¢s answer is clear and is demonstrated through his Ã¢â¬Å"Harm PrincipleÃ¢â¬ which states that Ã¢â¬Å"the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant.Ã¢â¬ -So Mill is referring to not just any harm, but specifically physical harm. If a person is harmed then his or her sovereignty over self no longer exists because sovereignty is after all the foundational position of power; this is MillÃ¢â¬â¢s justification of the harm principle. Children and those who cannot take care of themselves are allowed to be interfered with beyond the harm principle as they may well harm themselves unintentionally; such children and those who cannot take care of themselves do not, and cannot, have sovereignty over self. Applying MillÃ¢â¬â¢s Harm Principle strictly to current law would therefore remove Ã¢â¬Å"paternalisticÃ¢â¬ laws. For example there would be no reason to prohibit the laws prohibiting suicide, or drug taking or the wearing of seatbelts or crash helmets. From this perspective, laws that attempt to control such self regarding actions are wrong. They stunt the possibilities for individual development; the state should not be like an over protective parent, as for Mill, this does nothing but prevent the development of fully mature adults. MillÃ¢â¬â¢s argument primarily questions what is the rightful limit to the sovereignty of the individual over himself? And how much of human life should be assigned to individuality, and how much to society? Mill says, to individuality should belong the part of life in which the individual is interested: to society, the part which chiefly interests society. Essentially, what are the limits of the law and what are the abilities of the individual? Evidently for Mill, the idea that the state should be involved in Ã¢â¬Å"self regardingÃ¢â¬ actions is entirely wrong. The individual must be allowed maximum freedom of choice in matters that are to do with personal choice His assertion reflects his own strong commitment to the idea of individual liberty and the belief that Ã¢â¬Å"free individualsÃ¢â¬ develop into more fully formed human beings. His arguments essentially reflect a strong belief in human reasoning and the ability for all of us to develop into mature autonomous individuals. MillÃ¢â¬â¢s approach is therefore libertarian in that he saw the confining controlling state as a danger: whereas a society populated with free thinking individuals is a mature and successful society. Specifically referring to social tyranny, Mill states that Ã¢â¬Å"though society is not founded on a contract, everyone who receives the protection of society owes a return for the benefitÃ¢â¬ Ã¢â¬â meaning, if you conform to society, or public opinion, you will receive protection, i.e. you will not be condemned by society. Ã¢â¬â Mill furthermore claims that it would be a great misunderstanding to suppose that this doctrine is one of selfish indifference about the well being of others. Ã¢â¬â There is indeed a need for an increase in the exertion of promoting the good of others, but Mill feels this can be done without physically or mentally punishing those who behave in a way that people donÃ¢â¬â¢t agree with. Ã¢â¬â Ã¢â¬Å"Benevolence can find other instrument than whips and scourges, either of the literal or metaphorical sortÃ¢â¬ So, if a person shows Ã¢â¬Å"rashness, obstinacy or self conceitÃ¢â¬ or pursues Ã¢â¬Å"animal pleasuresÃ¢â¬ at the expense of those of feeling and intellect, it is expected that they will be lowered in the opinion of others. But, Mill makes it clear that we are not bound to seek the society of such an individual. Ã¢â¬â We have a right to avoid it, and a right to caution others against the individual. Ã¢â¬Å"If he displeases us, we my express our distaste: but we shall not feel called upon to make his life uncomfortableÃ¢â¬ Ã¢â¬â So if an individual has made a bad choice, we shouldnÃ¢â¬â¢t condemn them further. Ã¢â¬â Ã¢â¬Å"If he has spoiled his life by mismanagement, we shall not for that reason desire to spoil it furtherÃ¢â¬ At this point, Mill makes a clear distinction between the part of a personÃ¢â¬â¢s life which concerns only himself and that which concerns others. He questions how the conduct of a member of society can be a matter of indifference to the rest of society, Ã¢â¬Å"no person is entirely isolated.Ã¢â¬ If he damages his property, he does harm to those who derived support from it, or if he deteriorates his bodily faculties, he becomes a burden on others. So even if his actions do no direct harm to others, he is never the less detrimental by example. As a liberalist, Mill stresses the importance of the individual and freedom. In a liberal sense, freedom means individual freedom. You are at Ã¢â¬Å"libertyÃ¢â¬ to do as you wish, there are no constraints upon how you choose to live your life, you are able, unhindered by tradition or inherited position to achieve your full potential. This idea opposes the characteristic of political tyranny Ã¢â¬â i.e. the imposition of positive freedom; restriction and barriers. As Isaiah Berlin explained, negative and positive liberty are not merely two distinct kinds of liberty; they can be seen as rival, incompatible interpretations of a single political ideal. There are different ways to define liberty within a society. Isaiah Berlin talks about the two different types. Berlin agrees with the idea of negative liberty and thinks the purpose of government is not to show any visions of life; rather, it is to give them freedom to find out for themselves what the good life is. Berlin supposes that there should be a small government that will protect everyoneÃ¢â¬â¢s individual rights. In a society where negative liberty is prevalent problems begin to arise when you begin to worry about government and not your private life. Negative liberty also allows everyone to have a sphere of rights. You are also able to become what you want and you have more self-control, because there is no pressure to conform to the Ã¢â¬Å"normÃ¢â¬ of the community in order to keep the society running smoothly. Rousseau, an advocate for positive liberty thinks that self-mastery is necessary for us as individuals and says that we should want to be the masters of our own life. Positive liberty is, Ã¢â¬ Wishing to be a subject, not an object; to be moved by reasons, by conscious purposes, which are my own, not by causes which affect me, as it were, from outside.Ã¢â¬ By participating in your government and thinking for yourself you can achieve self mastery. By having political self-mastery you are free to form a society which forms your values, which leads to democracy. Mill, as a liberalist, believes there ought to be a minimum area of personal freedom which on no account can be violated. Mill says, Ã¢â¬Å"If this boundary is overstepped, the individual will find himself in an area too narrow for even that minimum development of his natural faculties which alone makes it possible to pursue, and even conceive, the various ends which men hold good or right or sacred.Ã¢â¬ Mill says there must a certain amount of personal freedom so that you grow as an individual, so therefore, there needs to be a distinction between private life and public authority. Ã¢â¬ËFreedom for the pike is death for the minnowsÃ¢â¬â¢; the liberty of some must depend on the restraint of others. In this type of society some people are held back for the betterment of others. The idea that for every person on top there must be someone below them must be accepted. The other philosopher in question, Frederic Nietzsche, German philosopher of the late 19th century challenged the foundations of traditional morality and Christianity. He believed in life, creativity, health, and the realities of the world we live in, rather than those situated in a world beyond. Like Mill, Nietzsche wanted to replace old values with new ones. He wanted to move towards a new type of human being. Ã¢â¬â Ã¢â¬Å"The UbermanÃ¢â¬ In NietzscheÃ¢â¬â¢s writing, Ã¢â¬Å"Beyond Good and EvilÃ¢â¬ he speaks of the Ã¢â¬Å"new philosophersÃ¢â¬ Ã¢â¬â individuals of Ã¢â¬Ësocio Ã¢â¬â intellectual statusÃ¢â¬â¢ who must pave the way forward for a new world. Ã¢â¬â Who must rise above the confinements of political and social tyranny. Essentially, through asserting their Ã¢â¬Å"will to power.Ã¢â¬ Nietzsche refers to these individuals as the aristocrats, the elites. These Ã¢â¬Å"nobleÃ¢â¬ men will assert their will to power. Ã¢â¬â An ability that will have been passed down from generations. The new philosophers or Ã¢â¬Å"noble breedÃ¢â¬ will possess the Ã¢â¬Å"master moralityÃ¢â¬ the morality of the aristocratic, that which makes values for others and sees itself as noble. At this point, Nietzsche introduces the Ã¢â¬Ënotion of superiorityÃ¢â¬â¢ Ã¢â¬â the idea that these Ã¢â¬Å"free spiritsÃ¢â¬ or new philosophers will assume a place of superiority in the social and intellectual hierarchy over those who are confined by political and social tyranny. In several aphorisms, he emphasizes a higher type of man, one who believes and demands an order of rank and disdains democracy and equality. Those inferior individuals, he refers to as Ã¢â¬Å"the herd.Ã¢â¬ The herd succumb to social and political tyranny, and so are Ã¢â¬Å"slavesÃ¢â¬ to it Ã¢â¬â and they can not change. Ã¢â¬â It is not in their genes. It is ok for the herd to be confined by political and social tyranny, but not for the elites. Ã¢â¬â The elites must be the dominant force, not controlled by a force. NietzscheÃ¢â¬â¢s fundamental principle is Ã¢â¬Å"the will to power.Ã¢â¬ Nietzsche refers to it as Ã¢â¬Å"an essence of life.Ã¢â¬ For Nietzsche, the underlying driving force of change is will. All drives come from a will to power, which is; the drive for freedom and domination over other things. We see it in our daily lives; in every argument there is a striving force for mastery and victory; even in the hierarchical nature of organisations e.g. manager vs. worker, teacher vs. pupil, politicians, preachers and even in the sex act itself. But, for Nietzsche, political and social tyranny seeks to tame this primeval drive and to suppress it. It is the weak and the herd who let their desires and will be suppressed. It is the role and duty of the Ã¢â¬Ënew philosopherÃ¢â¬â¢ to cultivate it. Nietzsche strongly attacks religion. Especially Christianity. For Nietzsche, religion is a modern manifestation of political and social tyranny. Religion seeks to suppress the will to power. He refers to religion as Ã¢â¬Å"an ongoing suicide of reasonÃ¢â¬ and has similarities with Freud in that he thinks religion is a Ã¢â¬ËneurosisÃ¢â¬â¢ or mental illness. Ã¢â¬Å"Wherever the religious neurosis has appeared on earth we find it tied to three dangerous dietary prescriptions: solitude, fasting and sexual abstinence.Ã¢â¬ So for Nietzsche, being a Christian, means denying ones desires, it means self sacrifice for the sake of God (whom he believes is dead) and showing pity and charity for others allegedly leads to the elevation of the weak-minded. Nietzsche believes we shouldnÃ¢â¬â¢t show such charitable acts, or make unnatural sacrifices. Christians are the herd, because they follow such beliefs and live their lives by them. The herd are not in control of their lives, for they live by a set of principles that are not their own. Christianity as a form of tyranny takes over the individual. We self mutilate when we feel guilty. Nietzsche says we shouldnÃ¢â¬â¢t feel guilty, as its better to do something and experience it, taking from it what we will, rather than be told not to do it at all. Political and social tyranny does not give an individual the chance to do this and places restrictions upon the individual. Like Mill, Nietzsche valued individualism above all else, but he saw that as a result of the acquiescence to social and political tyranny (e.g. religion) followed a Ã¢â¬Å"herd mentalityÃ¢â¬ where everybody follows one another for fear of disapproval by public opinion, or in the case of religion, disapproval by God. The herd has Ã¢â¬Ëgiven upÃ¢â¬â¢ their will to political and social tyranny. And so are weak to their superiors, as reflected in their values. But Nietzsche suggests that people want this. He refers to slaves wanting and accepting political and social tyranny, and relating to the modern manifestation of this through religion, it provides truth and certainty. The slave is led by a superior guide, and wants to be, because it is comforting. So hence, Nietzsche sees the Enlightenment or Ã¢â¬Ëage of reasonÃ¢â¬â¢ as Ã¢â¬Ëenraging to the slaveÃ¢â¬â¢ because it removes an Ã¢â¬ËAbsolute TruthÃ¢â¬â¢ I.e. God. So forth, the slaves have to find their own truths. Both philosophers contribute from different stand points. Mill on one hand speaks from a liberalist perspective. Liberals see humans as essentially rational thinking creatures capable of making informed decisions and despises the kind of paternalistic controls of a political tyranny that characterised the previous feudal period. Where Nietzsche on the other hand comes from an elitist standpoint. So, for Nietzsche, the most Ã¢â¬Å"humanÃ¢â¬ or natural of societies are those based on aristocratic principles. Thus, societies with clear and very wide social class divides are the most appropriate of humanity. Clearly defined class distinctions that Nietzsche would have liked are the times of the Ancient Greeks, Romans, Feudalism and even aspects of Nazism. Ã¢â¬â Orders in which richness, excess, cruelty and sensuality were encouraged. This is where a major difference between NietzscheÃ¢â¬â¢s philosophy and MillÃ¢â¬â¢s becomes apparent. Mill criticises the political control of a tyrant on an individualÃ¢â¬â¢s freedom, yet Nietzsche claims that these aristocrats are Ã¢â¬Å"living for themselvesÃ¢â¬ The aristocrats have asserted their will to power over the people. He justifies this by saying that these societies are natural, because the will to power was exercised properly, by the powerful over the weak. Both have similar views on the topic of religion, arguing that no longer should one set of religious truths be imposed on a population. To move forward, to progress, is to explore the world through the exercise of human reason and critical enquiry. For Nietzsche, we must continually question everything, for there is no absolute truth. We have to find our own truth. We do this by being individual, and not following a herd. For Mill, we are rational thinkers, and bases his theory on this view Ã¢â¬â that we will come to sensible conclusions. Hence, both philosophers advocate maximising negative liberty as a necessary condition for human flourishing. With the freedom to be individual without the barriers or constraints of tyranny, we as a society and as individualsÃ¢â¬â¢ progress and new ideas are formed. New values are made, replacing old ones. The Elitist vs. the Liberalist approach is where the two philosophers differ in attitudes. Taking into consideration a rejection of negative liberty, this could be used to pave the way for an alternative account.
Posted by Unknown at 2:52 AM
Monday, July 29, 2019
Symantec to generate a robust overall business strategy - Essay Example Company Profile Symantec Corp., founded in 1982 by visionary computer scientists, has had strong development strategy that saw acquisition of a number of corporations and enterprises to become what it is today. with time, the company has evolved to become one of the worldÃ¢â¬â¢s largest software companies providing employment opportunities to about 18,500 employees in more than 50 countries(About Symantec, 2013, web). Accordi8ng to BarronÃ¢â¬â¢s Table (2013, web), Symantec reported revenues of $6.73 billion in fiscal year (FY) 2012 with a profit of $1.17 billion, and recently reported third quarter FY 2013 results were higher than Q3 2012. Symantec is one of the leaders in the security software market, and its ranking in the BarronÃ¢â¬â¢s 500 table rose from 267 to in 2012 to 14 in 2013. The major competitors to Symantec include Macafee, Postini and Websens (About Symantec, 2013, web). Business Strategy SymantecÃ¢â¬â¢s goal is to continue to improve its existing products and services, and at the same time develop new, innovative products and services that solve important unmet or underserved needs. Over time customers will have more and better choices that will continue to meet their evolving needs and deliver better value. Symantec is focusing on 10 key areas that combine existing products and services into new, innovative and comprehensive solutions that meet multiple customer needs with integrated and higher value offerings. The overall development process is estimated to take six to 24 months depending on the specific offering (BarronÃ¢â¬â¢s Table, 2013, web). These future offerings are intended to align with meeting three key customer needs: Making it simple to be productive and protected at home and work; keeping businesses safe and compliant; and keeping business information and applications up and running. Information Systems and Strategy An organizationÃ¢â¬â¢s information system includes people, business procedures, and organizational resou rces aimed at collecting data and processing that data to enhance organizational success and development. All information systems involve the acquisition of information, processing of that information and finally the application of that information into various organizational needs. Symantec has a well developed IS strategy that focuses on the use of IS in supporting its business development and growth strategy. By delivering on its information management strategy, the organization protects information completely, deduplicates all information everywhere, thus eliminating redundant data. Further, it provides customers with delete confidently and discover efficiently in the use of its products. New delivery models such as the Symantec Enterprise Vault 9.0 and Enterprise Vault Discovery Collector provides customers with the ease of storage, management and discovery of information across the enterprise (Symantec CorporationÃ History, 2013, web). Proposed Information Strategy, Comparis on with the Current Strategy and Evaluation There is an increase in the need for adopting proper and reliable information systems for every organization. Currently, due to the increase in the level of competition in the current business environment, every organization seeks to implement competitive strategies aiming at winning customers. Symantec corp. operates in a highly competitive business environment. With the increase in the number of organizations providing security and protection to enterprises, organizations and individuals,
Posted by Unknown at 6:24 AM
Sunday, July 28, 2019
Application of epidemiology - Case Study Example of the infections that have occurred within the past year at the facility include the E Coli infection that infected 6 patients at the hospitals Ward 10. Records at the institution also show that there was infection of Fever, coughs and foul smelling urine in various other wards during the same year. Most of the patients who reported high fever were the patients in the intensive care unit but this lasted only a week before it the situation was stabilized. There were 3 patients at the ICU at that time, two males and a female and they recorded high temperatures from late at night till early morning.The other outbreak of these infections was in the pediatric ward, Ward 5 where there was a breakout of cough infections. At the time, the ward had 12 patients, 8 boys and 4 girls. The infection started with a small boy and within a week 7 other patients at the ward had already been put under cough medication. The situation was stabilized in two weeks as the records show this is when the coug h treatment stopped. The treatment of these infection results in an increased expenditure by the hospital. It is therefore important to determine who will bear the costs of this treatment, whether it is the patients, the hospital or if it will be shared by both of them. Even though the patients did not come to the facility with these diseases, they will have to be treated as soon as the symptoms are noticed. The patients can then decide not to pay the extra cost for this extra medication by claiming that the cost was due to negligence by the staff and therefore the cost of treatment lies with the hospital. The issue of whether the patients should be informed of these infections should also be discusses. This is because they might occur without the knowledge of the patients who might think it is just another infection related to their current situation. If they are made aware of these conditions they can sue the hospital for negligence, on the other hand if the patients become aware
Posted by Unknown at 9:58 AM
Saturday, July 27, 2019
Deforestation and the effects on the environment with philosophical theoretical issues - Case Study Example The specific social changes that are responsible for most of the environmental degradation are linked with rapid population growth, the proliferation of national and international trade leading to opening up of more markets due to increased demand and hunger for profits and major changes in land tenure systems that lead to the concentration of land. Traditional mechanisms were aimed at sustainable use of the environment. Since the days of the early man, nature was what guided man (Dharam, 1994). In fact, for the first civilization to exist, they had to adapt to the environment. Much has changed since those days as today, the reverse is true. Human beings no longer seek to adapt to the environment but rather seek for the environment to adapt to their needs. The insatiable need for energy has led to massive deforestation, mining and the use of unclean energy sources. These facts have led to the current infamous conditions generally referred to as global warming that is accelerated by t he emission of greenhouse gases into the environment (Gardiner, 2004). The trend does not seem reversible in the near future as there are very few viable alternatives to those causing harm to the environment and which humans can harness to the same magnitude as the unclean sources. The hunger for more energy is not the sole cause of environmental degradation. On the contrary, social inequalities on the lines of influence, material wealth and gender have been mentioned as part of the contributors to this dangerous trend. Environmental deterioration is not a light matter. In fact, there are numerous numbers of people who bear the blunt for the damage done to the environment. These effects may be manifested in the health, livelihood and well-being of the victims. Pollution and natural resource depletion can be in terms of soil erosion which robs the soil of its mineral contents and renders it infertile hence unable to sustain plants, deforestation which entails the cutting down of the very vegetation that is responsible for the purification of air and formation of rainfall and the depletion of both plant and animal species which inadvertently occasions an imbalance in different ecosystems (Munasinghe, 1993). When these occurrences happen, people are forced to change their ways in a bid to adapting to the new conditions. Consumption and production patterns are affected. The changes that lead people to change their income generating activities, to migrate and reorganize their entire livelihoods ultimately lead to the change in social structures (Vivian & Ghimire, 1990). The transformations usually have a ripple effect on other societies and the result is that more pressure is put on the existing natural resources. For example, a family that is dependent on electrical energy for their domestic usage in rural areas and who experience a dip in their disposable income will be forced to result to more economic sources of energy. This might lead them to adopt firewood an d coal as their primary source of fuel. Naturally, these alternatives are part of the environment and as such, more pressure on the already dwindling natural resources. Discussion Many people simply refer to deforestation as the depletion of forests. The Food and Agriculture Organization which is a department of the United Nations refers to deforestation as Ã¢â¬Å"complete clearing of tree formations (closed or open) and their replacement
Posted by Unknown at 1:32 PM
Friday, July 26, 2019
The Crowd at Mansion Night Club - Essay Example Most of the people outside the club are young people albeit above 18 years of age. Most of the young people are idling around and conversing in small tones in groups. Others stand near their parked cars in the crowded car park. Although the loud music from the club can be heard from the car park, some of the small groups standing on their cars have turned on loud music from their sporty and flashy cars. This causes a mixture of noise from the disco hall and music emanating from different cars in the car park. The evening sunset and cool temperature seem to complement the noisy music mixture. Heavily built guards heavily guard the entrance to the disco hall. The guards are armed with weapon detectors, which they use to inspect every person before entering the hall. The guards are so heavily built that they seem to occupy the whole entrance and it is not possible to simply push through the entrance. They also inspect the tickets before allowing people to get into the hall. The queue to the entrance is long and winds up at the far end. People on the queue have one thing in common. All people are wearing their best entertainment outfits most of which are brightly colored. Most of the women are dressed in the currently fashionable spaghetti tops and low-heeled shoes. Men, on the other hand, are dressed in straight jeans and sporty shoes. The disco arena is fully packed with people. Although most of the crowd is on the dancing arena, others have preferred relaxing on the well-arranged seats around the dancing area. The whole place is filled with disco lighting and the music is very loud. The crowd on the dancing arena sings along to their favorite tunes and they shout loudly whenever the emcee prompts them to do so. Most of the people in the crowd are dancing vigorously with the latest dancing style.
Posted by Unknown at 5:06 PM
Thursday, July 25, 2019
DRAMA OF DIVERSITY - Assignment Example It is my personality around those I do not know well that has led to me being labeled and judged unfairly. At several different junctures throughout my life, I have dealt with people who are acquaintances or people that I come into contact with casually. Sometimes, when I engage these people in a conversation, they will tell me straight to my face that they believed I was really stuck up or arrogant before talking to me. I am always astounded and hurt at this revelation. I was brought up to be a humble and well-mannered person, so having these people label me in this fashion is extremely upsetting. I then have to tell these people that I am merely a quiet and reserved person, but this doesnÃ¢â¬â¢t change the fact that their words sting me. I canÃ¢â¬â¢t help but want to point out the fact that their actions in relaying this label to me shows me a lot about their character. In the end, I just have to remind myself that everyone judges and labels others. I think that the most unfair judgements and labels are those that are formed without knowing a person at all. Essentially, this kind of judgement reminds me of a person being sentenced in a courtroom without the ability to showcase evidence to the contrary. It is because of my own experiences with unfair judgements, that I make it a point to not judge a person, especially if I donÃ¢â¬â¢t know them very
Posted by Unknown at 8:42 PM