Critical thinking Essay Example for Free

Critical thinking Essay 1. How does critical thinking affect you as a reader and writer? How can thinking critically improve your writing? Critical thinking affects a person as a reader and writer in that it is essential to be able to absorb and assimilate knowledge from the environment as well as organize one’s own thoughts and express oneself in a clear and comprehensive manner. It is important to consider critical thinking as being a twofold process. As a reader, one is able to utilize critical thinking as a tool to analyze information being taken in from the outside. Not all information is useful or truthful to a person, and critical thinking is a method of filtering out what is incomprehensible or untruthful and absorbing what is meaningful and valid. As a writer, critical thinking is used in relation to one’s own personal creative thoughts, coming to subjective conclusions about what one believes about the world and expressing these beliefs through writing. Critical thinking is able to improve people’s writing in that the ideas one wants to express become central to the writing process, to develop the perfect way of stating what one desires to say. It is essential to utilize critical thinking in both reading and writing, so that one is able to take in and organize the information from the external environment and make personal judgments and assertions about what one believes. All situations and experiences are both objective and subjective, in that people experience events within the context of the external world. It is important to be able to digest and process information from the external world in an organized fashion, so that one is able to accurately describe and share one’s experiences with others. 2. Read the following Discussion Question response written by Owen, a fictional student. Identify areas of vagueness and ambiguity and discuss how you might clarify the e-mail message using the writing principles addressed in the text. In the response written by Owen, the writing style is such that the reader is not able to clearly understand what is being said. There are instances of vagueness and ambiguity in the writing, and Owen is left appearing as if he does not truly understand what he is supposed to be writing about. For instance, Owen states that critical thinking affects him in â€Å"all ways†. Although this may be true, there is not enough information describing in which ways he is affected. It is important to include enough detail in writing, so that the reader is able to fully comprehend what is being claimed. Owen goes on to say that clear writing is the â€Å"hardest thing in the world†. Although Owen may be having difficulty with his own writing, clear writing is not the hardest thing in the world for all people. Instead of generalizing and making blanket statements, Owen should be plain and honest in saying that clear writing is difficult for him personally. Further on, Owen claims that critical writing is like business writing in that they both need a certain amount of structure, yet then claims that â€Å"structure is harder†. These ideas are simply uncorrelated and do not logically proceed from one another. One cannot compare two styles of writing as being similar and then immediately state that they are dissimilar, at least not without a clear explanation and transition. Overall, Owen could improve his own writing style by paying attention to explaining himself in detail, by taking the necessary time to organize his own thoughts before writing them down. It is vital to express oneself in a clear and comprehensive manner, so that other people are able to easily understand what is being conveyed.

Commercialization And Profit Making Incentive In Healthcare Economics Essay

Commercialization And Profit Making Incentive In Healthcare Economics Essay Commercialization and the profit making motive in healthcare has been an issue for heated debate in recent times. Should the healthcare industry be regarded as a for profit enterprise or retain the philosophical approach intended which should be to treat sick patients at the barest minimum available price? I will with this essay present an argument against commercialization or a profit making incentive by looking at it from the perspective of the physician, the economy, the patient and all other stakeholders in the sector. As far back as ancient China, a member of a family was expected to be proficient in the art of medicine in other to meet the health demands of his kin. This has eventually evolved into receiving a financial reward for this expertise and hence the emergence of the medical profession as we have known it to be. A doctor sees a patient and receives a fee for treatment offered. This is in itself not a bad thing as quite agreeably, a service has been offered and like most services, should involve remuneration. Only problem with this is that unlike most other types of services, healthcare is quite a peculiar form of service as it doesnt follow the normal laws of economics. For example, a hotelier can decide not to accommodate an individual without the financial capacity to pay for a room but it screams out against all the medical profession has stood for in all these years to turn an individual (who for the sake of strengthening this argument, needs a minimal intervention to prevent a life threatening catastrophe) without the financial capacity away from the hospital. Needless it is to mention that the medical profession is one that has been governed by ethics and rules, the very foundations that make the profession a noble one. A profit making motive serves to do a whole lot more damage than good. Basic definitions Before resuming this essay, it will be important to understand the basic definitions of to concepts which will be the sole foundations of this argument. Profession: As Hodson and Sullivan explain, a profession is a knowledge-based occupation with high status that has four principal characteristics: specialized knowledge, autonomy, and authority over other subordinate occupational groups, and a degree of altruism (Hodson and Sullivan, 2002). These four characteristics can be said to serve as the basic ideologies which define a profession. Commercialized healthcare: Provision of healthcare services through market relationships to those who can afford it; investments in and production of services and of inputs to them, for cash income to profit, including private contracting and supply to publicly financed health services; and healthcare finance by individual payment and private insurance. (UNRISD, 2005) COMMERCIALIZATION AND THE PATIENT It has been effectively argued that putting a price on health will reduce number of patients who seek unnecessary procedures or surgeries such as in the case of cosmetic surgery, or even more positively make people more health conscious for example people will avoid being morbidly obese as they know that the cost of a gastric by-pass surgery will be overwhelming, and will do all they can to get into shape, eat healthier and live a relatively healthier life than if it wasnt expensive. However, the relationship between a physician and the patient is one of trust, where the patient subjects him/herself to the judgement of the physician, judging that the physicians decision about his/her health will be solely guided by the patients best interest at heart, a vulnerable position, very open to abuse and can encourage to promote profit producing drugs, unnecessary surgeries, tests and treatment. In this situation, the possibilities for manipulation and abuse of the trust are limitless. Studies have shown reduced trustworthiness amongst for-profit institutions (Schlesinger et al., 2005). There have been cases heard of doctors keeping patients on dialysis earlier than they should be so that more money can be made, or refusing/not suggesting a kidney transplant which can stop the dialysis altogether. In particular, the relationship between the provider and consumer in this case cannot be compared to what gives under normal economic market forces. This is because the healthc are consumer is not sovereign and lacks the medical know about their condition and what they exactly require. Besides the sick or frightened patients do not regard their physicians as they would normal purveyors of goods and services nor do they regard the hospital as a department store. This is all without mentioning the economic impact it will have on the patient, who might be made to pay for what is relatively cheaper, or even totally unnecessary and that might not be beneficial to the patients health at all. In a for-profit enterprise, treatments and procedures lacking an opening for profit, however effective and cost saving will be disregarded to make way for newer and sometimes even unreliable but far more profitable procedures and treatment. One of the most pressing issues in this is the health inequality gap this creates especially amongst socio-economic groups. Richer individuals who are able to afford the large sums required for their treatment will ultimately survive longer than those who are less privileged. Even the UK health system, which commenced a comprehensive free healthcare system by the mid twentieth century funded by tax revenue, still faces issues with health inequality, how much more a system where healthcare is out of pocket service and with the possibility of profit making motive. COMMERCIALIZATION AND THE DOCTOR The medical doctor is one who has gone through gruelling training to acquire medical skill a supporter of commercialization can easily argue. The cost of training a doctor varies in different countries but arguably tops the list in these countries nonetheless as the training takes longer than a regular undergraduate programme, and of all professions, it is the one that requires constant reading and updating, after all, we are dealing with human lives here. And so, it has been said that well paid professionals, who have no need to worry about their daily needs, and/or catering for their families tend to be the most effective. It is argued that they will be able to concentrate on their jobs fully and perform most efficiently. While comfort cannot be ignored as comfort brings happiness and happiness leads to efficiency, this has never been the backbone of the medical profession. I believe the healthcare provider should be adequately compensated, but not like businessmen, or else the consumer will be perceived as a commodity and no longer as a sick patient in need. For example a healthcare deliverer who is driven for profit, will be biased in the provision of his services, where he/she will have more zeal and attention to a profitable case than he would in a non-profitable one. The physicians oath, which with its third line declares that I will practise my profession with conscience and dignity; the health of my patient will be my first consideration, must always be at the back of his/her mind. Commercialization will lead to leaving certain values and morals that are necessary to a community, such as caring, compassion, charity. The idea of altruism should be perpetuated by all healthcare providers and their primary concern has to be the alleviation of human suffering and the restoration of health. Society must not allow such important and fragile virtues to be extinguished by the self-interest that drives for-profit enterprise. Furthermore, as a marketing scheme, multinational drug companies spend more and more on education in medical schools, and also on doctors with the aim of eventually influencing the physicians decision making, tilting to favour the companies sometimes at the expense of the patient. COMMERCIALIZATION AND THE ECONOMY Health is one of the main priorities of a country and the provision of affordable healthcare and a good welfare system should not be a privilege to any member of a large society. Unfortunately, this will not be seen in a profit oriented health setting. Solicitors of for-profit health institutions will argue that with the advent of managed care, less and less will be spent on healthcare. This is by introducing policies of insurance into healthcare because the more people subscribed to the system, the cost for healthcare will be spread over all of them. Physicians under this programme will be advised to use less expensive treatment and sometimes at the expense of the patient. The cost to the workforce of sick patients who are unable to carry out normal daily activities will be very obvious. Also, when the financially capable are the ones who are more likely to get medical attention and the ones who cannot are left out to dry, it further increases the upper-lower class margin creating a terrible inequality that should not be accepted. COMMERCIALIZATION OF HEALTH AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS One of the major driving forces of commercialization of healthcare is the introduction of investor owned institutions. Now everybody wants a dip of this now largely rewarding enterprise ranging from bankers to insurance managers, stockbrokers, economists and so on. This has only done nothing but to undermine the authority of the health care provider as he/she is now subject to higher authority; the authority of investors. This will not allow him/her make the best decisions in favour of the patient as his decisions will become profit oriented. There is also the issue of unfair competition for non profit health institutions. When for profit institutions agree to take only the wealthier clients and those who are able to pay, this indirectly shifts all those who are unable to pay to the non profit health care providers causing an undue and unfair burden on them. In some cases it can also turn non-profit institutions into for profit ones, and cycle continues gradually phasing the non-profit institutions out of existence. The medical establishment works closely with the drug multinationals whose main objective is profits, and whose worst nightmare would be an epidemic of good health. Lots of drugs must be sold. In order to achieve this, anything goes: lies, fraud, and kickbacks. Doctors are the principal salespeople of the drug companies. They are rewarded with research grants, gifts, and lavish perks. The principal buyers are the public from infants to the elderly who must be thoroughly medicated and vaccinatedat any cost! Why do the authorities forbid alternative medicine? Because they are serving the industry, and the industry cannot make money with herbs, vitamins, and homeopathy. They cannot patent natural remedies. That is why they push synthetics. They control medicine, and that is why they are able to tell medical schools what they can and cannot teach. They have their own sets of laws, and they force people into them. The healthcare industry has become so reliant on the big multinational co mpanies that these funders exert authority over the healthcare providers, and cause them to violate precepts of medical ethics (Grouse, 2008). Misplaced attention driven by profit making incentive is another issue. Multinational pharmaceutical companies focus their research and development on high profile, profit-making drugs like Viagra instead of developing cures for life threatening diseases in poorer countries.   COMPARISON OF THE UNITED KINGDOM AND THE UNITED STATES HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS The UK as earlier mentioned started a comprehensive free medical coverage for its citizens by 1948. The system is sponsored by tax revenue from its citizens. And as such, healthcare is fully monitored by the government through one body; the NHS which is Englands public health service provider, leading to the provision of free healthcare to its citizens. There are private health institutions for those who will want to pay for services but this is said to be patronized by just about 8% of the total population. Some of the disadvantages of this healthcare system are longer waiting lists as everyone has equal access to healthcare, questionable quality of service as the healthcare providers might sometimes forget that the patient has paid for the service required already through taxes. However, this system has the advantage of free healthcare and nothing beats that. The United State in comparison is largely owned and operated by the private sector. Healthcare insurance is provided largely by the private sector as well except for some health programmes such as the medicare, Medicaid, tricare, the childrens health insurance programme and the veterans health administration which in all are unable to cater for an appreciable percentage of the total population. This kind of healthcare system that is largely dominated by the private sector allows for the profit making incentive to be a common trend. Both systems their strengths and weaknesses Commercialisation of healthcare is something that has been thoroughly scorned on by members of the profession itself. Various medical associations have risen up to fight this threat to the profession. CONCLUSION It is true that a lot of investment goes into the training of a doctor or any healthcare specialist at that and that they need to be well remunerated for their services, however this should not be a primary focus of the service provider because as this essay has shown, the health market differs from all other markets and that the patient doctor relationship is one built solely on trust; trust that the right, best intervention is given to the patient. Perhaps most importantly, professionals must have an ideology that assigns a higher priority to doing useful and needed work than to economic rewards, an ideology that focuses more on the quality and social benefits of work than its profitability. This ideology is one that should be preserved for the sake of the profession. The younger generation of health care providers should also be considered so nobody should go into this profession with the aim of amassing wealth, so that the altruistic nature of the profession, which stands as one of its core values, will be preserved. Healthcare is a right and not a privilege and it goes without saying that every society is morally obliged to provide healthcare to its members. An increase in for-profit health care provision however, will only exacerbate the growing problem of accessibility to healthcare.

Causes of the Cuban Missile Crisis

Causes of the Cuban Missile Crisis Cuban Missile Crises Introduction Considered to be one of the most serious conflicts between the U.S and the Soviet Union during the Cold War, the Cuban missile crises brought the World a clash of democracy V.S communism with a deadly nuclear outcome. Known to the World as the Cuban Missile crises, to the Russians as the Caribbean Crises and to the Cubans and the October Crises it lasted sixteen days in October. The main characters involved were U.S President John F. Kennedy, Russian Premier Nikita Khrushchev and Cuban President Fidel Castro. The sixteen days in October 1962 was the closest time that a full out nuclear war was about to take place Background America USSR Free election No elections or fixed elections Democratic Autocratic / Dictatorship Capitalist Communist ‘Survival of the fittest Everybody helps everybody Richest world power Poor economic base Personal freedom Society controlled by the NKVD (secret police) Freedom of the media Total censorship The Cuban missile crises origins began at the end of the World War 2. After the war about to end the United States and the USSR started to disagree on the main ideas of how a post war Europe should look like. The Americans main aim of the war was to spread democracy and to spread their companys economic opportunities into Europe. This was very different to what the USSR wanted, the USSR suffered a lot during the war, and they lost a lot of people and suffered a lot of economic and social problem directly resulting from the war, because of this the USSR main post war thoughts were to protect themselves from other wars that may happen and to spread communism across the globe.   These differences between the two countries were obviously great and were bound to cause tension and problems. Origins of Russian-American Tension Ideological: The United States and the Soviet Union represented two completely different forms of government. In the United States, the government is chosen by free elections. The people have the right to form political parties so that they can voice their political opinions. They also have the right of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. In the Soviet Union, the government is chosen by the Communist Party. The people do not have the right to form their own political parties; they do not enjoy the right freedom of speech and the freedom of the press. Since these two systems of government are completely different to one another, this is bound to cause friction between the United States and the Soviet Union. Economic: The United States wanted to encourage free trade throughout the world. The Soviet Union wanted to close off her itself from international trade. Russia was afraid that trade with the West would open up Russia to western influences which would have ruined the strength of the one-party communist regime. These differences led to much bad feeling between the United States and the Soviet Union. Power rivalry: After the Second World War, with the decline of Europe, power was shared between the Soviet Union and the United States. As one superpower wanted to dominate the other, conflicts were to be expected. Immediate Causes Leading to the Cold War Early conflict between the Soviet Union and the United States began at the peace-time conferences. Their conflict was intensified after President Truman declared the Truman Doctrine and launched the Marshall Plan in 1947. Extension of Russian influence in Europe: Even before the end of the war, the Soviet Union had gradually extended its influence in Europe. By the fall of 1944, the Red Army had liberated and controlled a large part of Eastern Europe. By 1945, at the Yalta Conference, the Soviet Union obtained the Curzon Line as its new boundary line with Poland and also the control of the eastern zone of Germany. As the war was ending in May 1945, the Soviet Union quickly consolidated its control of Eastern Europe. The Red Army began by influencing the post-war elections. They intimidated the voters and changed the voting lists as they desired. Although the non-communists could still manage to get some votes, most of the votes went to the communists. As a consequence the coalition governments formed immediately after the war were largely dominated by the communists. Two of the key ministries Defense and Military (Police) were always under communist control. Stalin was not satisfied with communist control of Eastern Europe. In the meantime, he encouraged the communists to take an active part in the immediate post-war elections in Western Europe. In late 1946, the French and Italian Communists were becoming the most powerful parties in France and Italy. The reactions of the United States: Despite the increasing Russian influence in eastern and central Europe, many politicians in the United States were optimistic about the chances of co-operation with the Soviet Union after the war and did not support strong resistance against the Russian expansion. But from May 1945 onwards, the situation was changed. The U.S. government preferred a policy of strong resistance against Russia. Poor relations between the United States and the Soviet Union: The growing problem and deteriorating relations between the Soviet Union and the United States were reflected in two minor incidents in the year. Land-Lease was abruptly terminated by the United States and the Russian request for American economic aid for the purposes of post-war reconstruction was ignored by the government of the United States. NATO vs. the Warsaw Pact April 4th 1949 NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) was formed by the United States, Canada, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Netherlands, Luxembourg, France and the United Kingdom. NATO was set up to counter the military power of the USSR. In direct response to this, the USSR set up the Warsaw Pact consisting of Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Germany, and the USSR. Dark Blue: Founding members of the North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) Light Blue: Countries that joined NATO after 1949 Dark Red: Founding members of the Warsaw Pact Light Red: Countries that joined the Warsaw Pact after 1955 Bay of Pigs The Bay of Pigs was an unsuccessful attempt by US-aided Cuban exiles to launch an attack on Cuba to overthrow Fidel Castro. The invading forces were defeated in just two days. 2506 Cuban exile invaders were killed and most of the rest captured (later traded for 58millions dollars in food and medicine aid) and approximately 4000 Cuban military men and civilians died. This deepened Cuban and American tensions, which was made worse by the Cuban Missile Crises, whose aftermath is still seen to present day. Cuban Missile Crises By 1960 the United States had a considerable nuclear advantage over the USSR, both in terms of nuclear arsenal and proximity to the USSR. The United States had 27,297 nuclear missiles compared to 3,332 for the USSR. In 1961 the United States, as a means of deterrence, placed long range ballistic nuclear missiles in Turkey, meaning that Moscow was 16 minutes away from a strike. This deeply angered the Soviet regime and they responded by placing Missiles in Cuba who had recently become an ally under President Fidel Castro. The fear that Cuba had the America might try to invade again led to negotiations between Khrushchev and Castro. In April 1962 Castro agreed to the supply surface to air missiles and surface to surface missiles to Cuba for defensive purposes. By May 1962 under Soviet control and supervision nuclear missiles were beginning to be installed in Cuba. These were transported by more than 60 Soviet ships. As named by the Soviet Union, operation Anadyr was kept tightly guarded. The USSR sent bomber plans, troops to aid in the construction and to provide expertise in the installation and use of the weapons. In all were planned to deploy 60,000 troops, three R-12 missile regiments and two R-14 missile regiments. Troops were transferred by 86 ships, Between June 17 and October 22 there were transferred 24 launching pads, 42 R-12 rockets, including six training ones, some 45 nuclear warheads, 42 Il-28 bombers, a fighter aircraft regiment (40 Mig-21 aircraft), two Anti-Air Defense divisions, three mechanized infantry regiments, and other military units some 47,000 troops in total. During this period after various leaks of information, the Soviets denied any missiles being placed in Cuba and told the Americans that they did not want to enter into any confrontation and raise tensions. American distrust of the Russians was soon confirmed. In late August an American reconnaissance plane photographed a number of installations on Cuban soil. Even with the proof President Kennedy was still convinced that these were built for defensive purposes on the part of the Cubans fearing an invasion of Cuba again by the Americans. After meeting the Soviet Ambassador, President Kennedy voiced his concerns over the installations and was constantly told not to worry, that there was no offensive missiles in Cuba and that the military buildup was insignificant. After more reconnaissance flights, using U2 manned planes, the United States was able to confirm the location and amount of nuclear missiles, this lead to confusion in the United States Government. After President Kennedy saw the photographs he brought together most of his key advisors to come up with a plan on how to deal with the threat. America intelligence stood by its convictions that the USSR would not install nuclear missiles in Cuba. The advisors quickly came up with a five different courses of action to be taken as a response to the threat. Do nothing Use diplomatic pressure to get the Soviet Union to remove the missiles An air attack on the missiles A full military invasion Naval blockade of Cuba After much careful discussions and the fear of Russian revenge if Cuba was attacked, the decisions was made to blockage the Cuban sea and stop all shipments coming into the area. The main aim was to check all ships coming into Cuba to see their cargo and examine any missiles or offensive weapons that were coming into the country. Most South American countries assisted in this blockade. At 7 p.m. October 22, President Kennedy delivered a televised radio address announcing the discovery of the missiles. Premier Khrushchev sent a message to President Kennedy saying that he considered the blockade and ‘pirate action against the ships as a provocative move that would eventually lead to war, he ordered the ships to ignore the American blockade. To this President Kennedy responded by saying that the United States was forced into this action after being repeatedly assured that there was no offensive missiles which provided to be a lie The next morning, Kennedy informed the executive committee that he believed only an invasion would remove the missiles from Cuba. However, he was persuaded to give the matter time and continue with both military and diplomatic pressure. He agreed and ordered the low-level flights over the island to be increased from two per day to once every two hours. He also ordered a crash program to institute a new civil government in Cuba if an invasion went ahead. At this point the crisis was apparently at a stalemate. The USSR had shown no indication that they would back down and had made several comments to the contrary. The U.S. had no reason to believe otherwise and was in the early stages of preparing for an invasion, along with a nuclear strike on the Soviet Union in case they responded militarily, which is what they assumed. As the crises continued secret negotiations were taking place constantly between the United States and the Soviet Union, the Soviets wanted the United States to remove its Jupiter missiles from its bases in Turkey as it claimed they pose as much of a threat as their missiles in Cuba. On the other hand the Americans wanted to Russians to remove all missiles and installation that they had placed in Cuba and America would guarantee that it will not invade or offer assistance to anyone who wanted to invade Cuba; it would lift the sea blockage and consider removing the missiles from Turkey. On October 27th 1962, a Lockheed U-2 reconnaissance plane that was flown by Major Rudolf Anderson left Florida to Cuba to take surveillance pictures of the military buildup, and at approximately 12pm, Major Andersons plane was shot down by Russian anti-aircraft missiles, he was instantly killed and was the only casualty from enemy fire during the conflict. This infuriated the Americans, who demanded that the Russians cease all their operations in Cuba and halt any fire; they viewed this as a start of war and took the gesture as an escalation in the violence. Although the commander, who fired, did so by himself, the Soviets were afraid that the Americans would view this as an escalation of war. All Soviet troops were quickly ordered to cease firing on American plane. After the Americans saw no change in the Soviet stance, and the Americans started to prepare for war, they came up with targets to be attacked by air, troops were readied, and plans were made for Cuba including a post-war government, the plans also involved a nuclear strike on Russia in case it got involved. America informed its NATO allies to be ready for an American response and to ready themselves in case the USSR responds in Europe. Ending the Crisis After much consideration between the Soviet Union and Kennedys cabinet, Kennedy agreed to remove all missiles set in Turkey on the border of the Soviet Union in exchange for Khrushchev removing all missiles in Cuba. Premier Khrushchev announced that they were dismantling the missiles in Cuba, while the Americans declared that they would not support or invade Cuba, however they did not mention removal of their Jupiter missiles from Turkey. Because the withdrawals from Turkey were not made public at the time, Khrushchev appeared to have lost the conflict and become weakened. The view was that Kennedy had won the contest between the superpowers and Khrushchev had been humiliated. References http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/coldwar.htm http://www.learningcurve.gov.uk/coldwar/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/ColdWar.htm http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/coldwar/ http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761569374/cold_war.html http://library.thinkquest.org/11046/days/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis http://www.johndclare.net/cold_war16.htm http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/ http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/archives/colc.html http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/cuba-62.htm

Much Ado About Nothing Essay: Effective Use of the Foil -- Much Ado Ab

Effective Use of the Foil in   Much Ado About Nothing      Ã‚  Ã‚   In The Marriage of Heaven and Hell, the famous British poet William Blake wrote that "without contraries there is no progression - Attraction and repulsion, reason and imagination, and love and hate are all necessary for human existence" (Blake 122).   As Blake noted, the world is full of opposites.   But, more importantly, these opposites allow the people of the world to see themselves and their thoughts more clearly.   For, as Blake asserts, without attraction, one cannot understand repulsion, and without imagination, one cannot understand reason.   In Much Ado About Nothing (MAAN), William Shakespeare uses this idea of the power of opposites to show the differences in two types of love.   Using the relationship, language, and actions of Hero and Claudio as a foil against those of Beatrice and Benedick, Shakespeare has painted a world in which the ideas of courtly love only serve to illuminate those of true love.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   In an essay on Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, William Kittredge defined the idea of courtly love that is illustrated in MAAN.   Kittredge said that courtly love must involve a love that is extremely idealized and superficial, with the vassal or servant-like suitor, who is often a valiant knight, devoting himself completely to an ideal woman who is often the daughter of a powerful man (Kittredge 528-529).   When this definition is applied to the relationship between Hero and Claudio in MAAN, one is able to recognize a perfect match.   For example, Claudio, a young lord of Florence, is a valiant soldier as is shown in the first scene of the play with the comments made by the Messenger: "[Claudio] hath borne himself beyond the promise of his age, doing ... ...hat is truly Much Ado About Nothing, becomes a commentary on the idea of love.   True love becomes illuminated through its reflection in its own foil - the ideals of courtly love.   The true relationship of Beatrice and Benedick compared to the relationship of Claudio and Hero, gives the reader not only a better understanding of the power of the literary foil, but also a foil into which that reader can reflect and better understand himself.    Works Cited "Blake, William." The Columbia Dictionary of Quotations.  Ã‚   CD-ROM. New York: Columbia UP, 1998. Kittredge, George. "The Marriage Group." The Canterbury  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Tales: A Norton Critical Edition. Ed. V.A. Kolve. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1989. 523-530. Shakespeare, William. "Much Ado About Nothing." The Norton Shakespeare. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1997. 1389-1443.

The History of Computing :: Essays Papers

The History of Computing In 1842 Babbage’s Difference Engine and the Analytical Engine Convinced his machine would benefit England, Babbage applied for and received one of the first government grants to build the difference engine. Hampered by nineteenth century machine technology, cost over runs, and the possibility his chief engineer was padding the bills, Babbage completed only a portion of the difference Engine before the government with drew its support in 1842, deeming the project â€Å"worthless to science†. Meanwhile Babbage had conceived of the idea of a more advanced â€Å"analytical engine†. In essence, this was a general-purpose computer that could add, subtract, multiply, and divide in automatic sequence at a rate of 60 additions per second. His 1833 design, which called for thousands of gears and drives, would cover the area of a football field and be powered by a locomotive engine. Babbage worked on this project until his death. In 1991 London’s Science Museum spen t $600,000 to build a working model of the difference engine, using Babbage’s original plans. The result stands 6 feet high, 10 feet long, contains 4000 parts, and weighs 3 tons. The Honeywell 400 and the second Generation of Computers. The invention of the transistor signaled the start of the second generation of computers (1959-1964). Transistorized computers were more powerful, more reliable, less expensive, and cooler to operate that their vacuum-tubed predecessors. Honeywell established itself as a major player in the second generation of computers. Burroughs, Univac, NCR, CDC, and Honeywell IBM’s biggest competitors during the 1960s and early 1970s became as the BUNCH. The IBM system 360 and the third generation of computers. The third generation was characterized by computers built around integrated circuits. Of these, some historians consider IBM’s system 30 line of computers, introduced in 1963, the single most important innovation in the history of computers. System 360 was conceived as a family of computers with upwards compatibility; when a company outgrew one model it could move up to the next model without worrying about converting its data. System 360 and the other lines built around intergraded circuits made all previous computers obsolete, but the advantages were so grate that most users wrote the costs of conversion off as the price of progress. In the early 1960’s, Dr thoms Kurtz and Dr. John Kemeny of Darmouth College began develoing a programming language that a beginner could learn and use quickly. Their work culminated in 1964 with BASIC.

Liberal Nature of Indian State Essay

The state is being perceived as an â€Å"organised structural and institutional whole† epitomizing the power relations of society. The state in a developing society arise from historical factors and interacts with society through its decisive role in the economic process of the nation. To study the nature of any particular state, it is necessary to analyse to relation between state, power, and social classes and the purpose of the state. The liberal democratic form stands on the foundation of democracy. The liberal critique of the Indian state can be read in the writings of Rajni Kothari, Atul Kohli, The Rudolphs, Gunnar Myrdal. The state is associated with modernity. The idea of nation is also linked with the state and is encompassed within it. The liberal movement did not develop in India, as in Europe, in response to the challenge of aggression of king but after a long anti-colonial struggle against the British Raj which culminated in the Partition of India and its Independence in 1947. The Constitution which was drawn up shortly after was essentially liberal in character. It was a product of the Western impact through British rule and contributed to India’s constitutional and political development. The constitution declared it as a sovereign socialist republic democratic country. Thus, Indian state is characterized as a liberal democratic model which provides for separation of powers and fundamental rights to the people. Moreover India is a representative form of government, where elections are held on the basis of universal adult franchise. Ram Mohan Roy, with whom the history of Indian liberalism begins, showed great concern for social reform and the upliftment of women, education as a means of social transformation, freedom of press and no censorship, all of which were inherited by the great liberals of India. Jawaharlal Nehru, ‘the chief architect’ of the modern Indian State,  considered the state to be the ‘trustee and guardian’ of the Indian people by looking after democratic aspirations and providing economic welfare. The influence of Nehru in the Indian state can be seen in the economic front, as it adopted the socialist path of development with a focus on planning for economic development. India’s liberalism in the modern period may best be described as a re-articulation, a re-articulation that was undoubtedly called forth by the new knowledge, enlightenment, political institutions and social patterns which Britain brought with her. The liberal view of the state is typically strong. Institutional strength is key in this and state and society remains separate. The state has to remain relatively autonomous from society. Legitimacy is also an important part of the liberal state, and this term started to be used in India especially during the 1975 emergency. India has been characterised as a ‘soft’ and ‘weak’ state by Gunnar Myrdal. The problem of a soft state is the crisis of legitimacy. Liberal critics have characterised India as a liberal state with strong institutions of the Parliament, independent judiciary, executive, along with fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy. Rajni Kothari argued that the Indian state sought to legitimise itself as an order-maintaining institution. The Nehruvian model succeeded during Nehru’s time, but gradually the masses awakened and pressure for redistributive politics grew. Moreover the state was becoming more centralised and lost its mediating structures of the party system. Ashis Nandy, an Indian political psychologist, envisaged the state as a protector of the interests of the Indian people from outsiders. Although, he noted that the state itself subjected the masses to oppression through institutional structures. He argued that it was preferable as the oppression worked from within and not arbitrarily. Atul Kohli explains the Indian state through its paradoxical apparatus of state government arising from growth of centralisation and powerlessness at the centre. Centralisation erodes the legitimacy of the state and its developmental power. Gunnar Myrdal criticized the inability of the state to enforce public policies to eradicate poverty or to enforce laws and dubbed the institutional model of the Indian state as â€Å"soft state†. According to Myrdal, the Indian state was soft as it had no power to rectify institutions that stood in the way of reform and development. As a result, it could not tackle the institution of caste directly, take measures of effective land reform, eradicate corruption or enforce ideas of development effectively through the people. One consequence of this softness has been the growth of left-wing extremism, which Manmohan Singh called the â€Å"gravest internal threat† to the country’s security. Myrdal’s ‘hard state’ would have been able to tackle Naxalism which has gravely affected the nation. The liberal approach focuses on institutions and processes to understand state and political power in India. The state is considered the central instrument of social progress and principal agent of transformation. According to the Rudolphs, there are two groups characterised in the Indian state, one being the ‘owners of production’ and the other being the ‘labourer’ group. They analysed the state as a mediator between these two conflicting groups, and in doing so, must remain autonomous in order to maintain structural unity of the state. The role of the state would hence be the â€Å"third actor†. The Rudolphs believe in the capability of India to become a strong state, unlike the weak state that Myrdal argued. The Rudolphs’ liberal perspective was directed at constitutional strength and legitimacy, citizen as an abstract category, and institutional strength in the form of bureaucracy which defined the identity of liberalism in the  Indian state. The bureaucracy played an important role in policy making and reflects good governance. The expertise of the members would provide efficient decision making. Liberal institutionalists believe in strengthening institutions to achive a strong state through legitimacy. This extra autonomy of legitimacy derived from law and ability to rule gets rid of the crisis of legitimacy which is a problem of the Soft State as Myrdal puts it. Before the emergence period of 1975, India had a paradoxical apparatus of state government. The excess power in the centre made the peripheries unstable, causing the core and periphery to constantly break in tussle. This led to a loss of faith from the people’s side, and re-institutionalising of the state during Indira Gandhi’s time. The bureaucracy also faces criticisms on account of maintaining neutrality arises if every rule is made by experts. And if the state becomes too reliant on expertise, it becomes idealist in nature. The Rudolph’s Command Polity talks about the state becoming the utmost power. The Rudolphs pointed out that India is a state that works and derives its legitimacy from demand.This polity in India gave way to crisis. State is not an entity which has always remained stab le. Reflection of individual liberties are a part of democratic liberalism. Demands from the lower class have to be included to maintain stability. The Marxist view sees the Indian state as a bourgeois state – where the benefits are only with the big industrialists and rich farmers. Though this nature does not completely dominates the state it exercises a powerful influence over the Indian state. India has a highly plural society marked by various ethnic groups of different language and different religion. After independence India has experienced difficulty to maintain its unity. But growth of violence, regionalism, poverty, slow development of economy has questioned the working  of Indian state and its nature. The impact of social rule is visible in India. Recently, faith in democratic, institution, redistributions, justice and secularism seems to be eroded in Indian state. However, the state continues to solve conflicting interest and development problem. Threats to individual freedom make it necessary for individuals to organise for civil liberties and constantly explore new realms for free expression. To create stability, the Indian state has to be strong. Thus today’s India stands as a political and economic paradox of a rich – poor nation with a weak – strong state. BIBLIOGRAPHY Indian Government and Politics- Sunder Raman Indian Political System – M.P Singh & Roy The Centrist Future of Indian Politics – Susanne Rudolph and Lloyd Rudolph

What’s the Buzz on Smart Grids

Case Study: What’s the buzz on Smart Grids 1) How do smart grids differ from the current electricity infrastructure in the United States? The main difference where the smart grids differ from the current electricity infrastructure in the United Sates is that there is no information currently available as to how much energy/electricity is being used and where it is being used. In simple words it can be said that currently there is no exchange of information between the provider and the consumer.The smart grids will be able to provide all information regarding the usage pattern of electricity consumption by the customer which would help in the effective usage of electricity. The grids will then be able to know as to when the consumption is at peak and when it is not being used much. Also with this technology the consumer will be able to monitor their energy consumption which would encourage them to save. 2) What Management, Organization and Technology issues should be considered when developing a smart grid?There may be a lot of issues the smart grid might have to face: a) Management Issues: It is very important that proper planning must be done before the implementation of smart grids. All aspects should be planed and discussed over and over again with the managers at each level. It is a huge project which involves a lot of investment and a failure at the planning stage which is the beginning would be a disaster. It is also very important to make correct decisions at the right time. If correct decision are not made it could mess up the project. ) Organization Issues: Before the implementation of the project it must be made sure that everything is being done legally and taking into consideration all government policies. People within the organisation play an important role. The roles of each individual should be defined and proper flow of information is required in all levels. c) Technology Issues: According to me this is the most issues that the project r elies on. On the whole it is a technology project and the investment cost is immense. It is very important that all Hardware, Software, Network and communication requirements are in place. ) What challenge to development of smart grids do you think is most likely to hamper their development? According to me the challenge the smart grids will face is the acceptance by the customers. Not all customers will want to accept this change. It is usually the case that people are reluctant towards change. Also, if the customers find out that they are going to pay for this change and technology most of them would say no.It is very important to decide how the project is going to cover such a huge cost. It should be stress that the project has a long term potential and would help the customers in the long run. ) What other areas of our infrastructure could benefit from the smart technologies? Describe one example not listed in the case. The areas of infrastructure that could benefit from this sm art technology are not one. But, an example could be construction and mining industries. Efficient way of using electricity should be used in these industries which would greatly reduce their cost on a project. 5) Would you like your home and community to be part of a smart grid? Why or Why not? Explain. I would certainly want my home to be a part of the smart grid because it will help save energy and cost over the long run.If I was able to monitor the usage of electricity and know how much each electrical item at my home consumes electricity I would use it more efficiently and safe a lot of cost. I would be more motivated to use energy efficient items. Also the case talks about the electrical items can be turned on/off from anywhere. Let me discuss this example to demonstrate the efficiency. I go to work in the morning at 9 AM which is when I turn of the air conditioner at my place, I would be working at my office till 5 PM before leaving my office I would turn on the air condition er at home so that by the time I reach home my home is nice and cool.This is a simple example how we could save on the electricity cost. Also with these grids the providers would know how the usage patterns are and decide on what rate should be charged from each customer. The only concern that I would have is that the cost of the actual setup of the grid. If that price is not immediately transferred to me I would be happy to accept this change. It should be well distributed and nominal so that the consumers do not feel the pinch.