mangos Posted July 2, 2011 Report Share Posted July 2, 2011 --clicked--- Most financial decisions are made because of greed. Financial decisions are those which directly affect the finances of an individual or a company. These crucial decisions can be the deliberating factor of whether an individual or company financially succeeds or fails. However, in many cases, success is measured by the profit made and thus, financial decisions are driven by greed- the prospect of making more. A prime example of this can be seen by the actions of many individuals during the subprime mortgage crisis in the United States. The subprime mortgage crisis occurred as a result of two main factors. The first being the lack of caution excericsed by bank and financial institutions who granted loans to individuals that would not normally qualify due to various reasons such as a poor credit history or income. The second is result of greed from these financially unstable individuals who made the decision to borrow hundreds of thousands of dollars from banks to purchase houses in hopes of selling them for profit at the peak of the housing bubble. It is the greed of these individuals that drove them to make speculative financial decisions and thus, when the housing market crashed, their finances fell with it, resulting in thousands of defaults in loans and the effective onset of the economic recession. As can be seen in this scenario, financial decisions made by individuals were driven by the prospect on making more via the housing market. Unfortunately for them, their greed led to poor decision making and their concurrent bankruptcy. However, not all financial decisions are made because greed. Indivduals or companies who have an altruistic outlook on life base their decisions instead on the welfare of society. For example, Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft and self made muli billionaire, recently announced that he would donate his earnings to charitable organizations rather than keep it for himself and his family. Gates, realizing the various shortcomings the world experiences, such as poverty, places higher value on the well being of society than the prospect of making more money for himself. Consequently, his financial decisions for his family are not based on greed. Whether financial decisions are made based on greed or not depends entirely on the values an individual or company has. Those who value the bettering of one self make decisions based on greed. This can clearly be seen in the individuals who, driven by the prospect of making more money through the housing market, make the decision to apply for loans that they could not afford. Conversely, those, such as Bill Gates, who value altruism and the bettering of society, make financial decisions absent of greed. Rather than focusing on making more for himself and his family, he decides to aid those in need through charitable organizations. Thus, it can be said upon analysis of these two examples that those who make financial decisions absent of greed will better benefit the society than those who base it on greed. thanks alot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaInhaler Posted July 2, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2011 -Clicked-Thank you for all your feedback I decided to try something new with the conclusion by focusing on the definition of one of the ambiguous terms, see if it works a little better. ------------------------------------------------------------- The study of history is more an art than a science. Describe a specific situation in which the study of history might be more of a science than an art. Discuss what you think determines whether the study of history is more an art or a science. History is a subject that investigates past objects and events. In its investigation it resembles an art form. Art is a process that presents items in a way that evokes human emotions and influences their intellect. Science is a process that organizes knowledge as testable predictions. Those who study history have to make inferences and create context in order to fully understand past events. These assumptions cannot be tested or applied in the present day. However, they do provoke us to think about their effects and often contribute to changing our feelings and perspectives about certain events. For instance when studying World War II, historians have looked at the events from social, cultural and environmental points of view in order to create the full picture of the war. While providing facts on battles that occurred during the war, historians have also focused on illustrating the social injustices that occurred, such as the annihilation and systemic targeting of the Jews by the Nazis. The historical study of events during World War II have evoked strong feelings and provoked many discussions throughout the world. The history of these events could not be experimentally tested, thus the history of World War II is more of an art than a science. However, there are instances where the study of history is more of a science than an art. When analyzing the history of tools used by humans during different time periods it is important to approach the study of these objects through experimental investigation. For instance, in order to determine how humans first began farming 10,000 years ago, historians had to analyze basic sickles and trowels made of clay through carbon dating, a biological process that determines the age of the historical object. In order to comprehend the purpose of these tools, historians had to run controlled experiments using models (of these tools) in order to determine their application in farming. Understanding the role of tools in farming and other human endeavours in history cannot be determined through inferences alone. This study must be approached scientifically by repeated testing. When looking at artefacts the study of history becomes more of a science than an art. In order to determine whether the study of history is more an art or a science one must determine the precise definition of history. If history is the study of past events then the study of history is an art since it connects various factors through inferences and assumptions that cannot be tested or proven. However, they do promote humans to think and reflect on these events. On the other hand, if history is the study of relics and artefacts then it is important to determine the application of these objects through experimental investigation, and the study of history becomes a science. You're welcome. Thanks for clicking. Appreciated. Adequate control of language. Evidence of some clarity of thought. I feel this essay will be scored a: JKLMNOPQRST Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jordan19 Posted July 2, 2011 Report Share Posted July 2, 2011 -cllicked-- thanks for marking the essays A nation’s history is shaped more by popular ideas than by the actions of its government. Describe a specific situation in which a nation’s history might be shaped more by the actions of its government than by popular ideas. Discuss what you think determines whether a nation’s history is shaped more by popular ideas or by the actions of its government. Democracy allows for the freedom of speech, and thus ultimately gives power to ideas of individuals. The history of a nation includes the culture, the reality of life during that time period, all of which are predecessors to the current time. Popular ideas, which are well recognized and prevalent in society are well respected, and acknowledged by everyone, and this shapes a nation’s history more than actions of the government. For instance, during the 1700-1800’s in France, this time period is remembered or marked as the “Enlightenment period,” where many new ideas had been generated in society. There were salons, where the nobility gathered to discuss prevalent and popular ideas of the time. One of these ideas was the government system proposed by the French philosopher Rosseau, which basically dictated how a government should be run and it’s responsibilities to the people. This idea was overwhelmingly accepted by everyone in society, and in 1740, the parliamentry system, as proposed by Rosseau was implemented into effect in France. Popular ideas during this time in France flourished during the time of enlightenment, and this influenced the culture and governmental system of French - ultimately, the history as we know it today. Thus, in this case, the history of France was influenced greatly by popular ideas rather than governmental action. There are instances; however, when the history of a country is influenced to a higher degree by governmental action, rather than popular ideas. Governmental intervention are policies, laws, and regulations which are put in place by political officials which citizens of a nation must adhere to or abide by. For example, the history of Germany is defined by the actions Nazi government during World War II, a period which lasted from 1939-1945. During the Nazi’s reign, they implemented many laws which were based on the idea that German people to be superior to any other race, and demanded the extermination of less inferior “species” such as the Jews and Gypsies. Although it is noted that such were popular ideas, it is the governmental policies which stemmed from these ideas which define the history of Germany during this time. Through these laws, the Nazi government were able to Jewish and Gyspy people from the general public, and put them into concentration camps. Furthermore, laws were drawn which made legal and mandatory the killing of these minority groups. Looking back at Germany during the World War II, the history is defined primarily by the actions of Nazi - a radical governmental group, who put into place many laws which killed millions of people. Thus, in this instance, history is influenced more so by the actions of the government, rather than popular ideas. The history of a nation is shaped more by popular ideas rather than governmental policies depend whether or not these actions by the government are involved in something radical, such as the killing of minority groups. If the government has not enacted radical policies, which affect the citizens of a country, then popular ideas may flourish in society, and these ideas are ones which define the history of a nation. France, for example, during the 1800’s was dubbed the age of enlightenment, where ideas flourished in Salon’s affecting the culture, and ultimately the government. This demonstrates an instance where popular ideas affect history more so than governmental regulation. On the otherhand, when the actions of a government engaged in something radical, such as the killing of minority groups in the instance of the Nazi, this defines the history of a nation, more so than the popular ideas during that time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jordan19 Posted July 2, 2011 Report Share Posted July 2, 2011 Progress often complicates as much as it simplifies. Describe a specific situation in which progress might simplify more than it complicates. Discuss what you think determines whether progress complicates or simplifies. In modern day society, progress is defined as the development of technologies which raises the quality of life for an individual. In many instances, these technologies simplify and solve problems, making life more convenient. The problem with the introduction of new technologies; however, is that they are new, and thus, these products are bound to expose problems which become more evident with their usage. Thus, although technological progress solves prexisting problems, in often reveals new problems, which complicates as much as it simplifies. One example of this is the modern cell phone, which has revolutionized communication between people. These devices come with many options which allow you to talk and text other people, and even allow you to acess your email or the internet. Nowadays, the use of cell phones has proliferated, and everybody is using it, and there are some inherent problems with this increased usage. For instance, the usage of cell phones while driving has been known to cause accidents, and many countries, such as Canada, have enacted laws which prohibit their usage together. Many people are found to be texting or using their phones to check the internet, and this takes their attention away from the road. After the introduction of the cell phone driving law in 2010 in Canada, many motor accidents were severely reduced, attributing to the fact that development of technologies - progress - comes with complications. Additionally, the usage of cell phones by teenagers in school have been known to distract students, and their revolutionary capabilities makes cheating on tests or exams much easier. It is clear that cell phones can cause social problems in school. There are instances; however, where technological progress simplifies more than it complicates. Some technologies, which have been developed for a single purpose, and thus, unlike technologies, such as cell phones, they cannot be readily abused in several situations, and less problems arise. For instance, the PEEBLES project is one developed by NASA which aims to develop a robotic computer which can be controlled by a student who is sick. When a student is sick and cannot readily attend a class, he or she can send in his or her robot surrogate, and this allows the individual to not miss class. Furthermore, results from the PEEBLE project have shown that this robot is able to simulate and mimic the personal experience of the child in a classroom, and students are able to treat the sick student the same, even though he or she is not in the classroom. There have not been any problems encountered by the PEEBLES project, and it has demonstrated a high success rate so far when implemented in the classroom. This project is thought to solve the problem of children missing school because they are sick, and can successfully mimic the classroom learning experience. Technological progress complicates as much as it simplifies depends on whether or not there have been other features added to the technology which detract from it’s original function. The original purpose of the cell phone was to enable conversation between two different people, yet the modern day cell phone has deviated from this purpose, and has added features such as texting, access to internet, email and more, all of which distract the individual using it. This distraction becomes a problem when using the cell phone on the road and in school, as these features create distractions in the former, leading to vehicle accidents, and in the latter are misused to aid and abeit in test situations. Thus, the usage of cell phones is an instance where technological progress creates more problems than it solves. On the other hand, the PEEBLES project has only one function so far: it is the aid and help children who are sick and cannot attend classroom. This technology has only one sole purpose thus far, and thus it simplifies and solves a single problem affecting the education in classroom. It has demonstrated much sucess without problems as a result, and Laws cannot change social values. Describe a specific situation in which a law might change a social change. Discuss what you think determines whether or not laws can change social values and when they cannot. Laws are simply policies, regulations, and legislations set forth by the government. Individuals of a nation must adhere to these laws, which may be prohibitive in their ruling, or prescribe an action which must be completed. Individuals in society may disagree with the law, yet still abide by these laws. The social values are independent of the laws, and they represent values and traditions percieved by society, and popular notions. Thus, the laws of a nation cannot change social values. One example of this is in the case of Martin Luther King, a black civil rights activist during the 1950’s. During this time in America, there were many laws which discriminated against black people, one of which was that black and white people were to segregate when sitting on a bus, with appropriate seating arrangments dictated by the law. Martin Luther King felt that these laws were unjust, and he sought to eliminate the disparity between the two races, and make blacks have equal rights to the white people. Through his passive activism at rallies, he was gather a movement which were able to convey such a notion - that blacks should be treated equal to the white counterparts. As a result of such, King was often thrown in jail for his partipication in rallies. This demonstrates a prime example in where laws cannot change social values because in this instance the laws of America did not change King’s perspective of what his idea that African American people should be treated on equal grounds as white people. There are instances; however, where the policies and regulations enacted by the government may change the public’s perception of certain ideas and notions. If the government of a nation sets rigid laws, where disobedience leads to a severe consequences such as death, this may intimidate the public into thinking a certain way, and thus in doing so, the laws can change social values. An example of this is seen during World War II, where the Nazi government implemented many laws which effectively asserted their superiority over other races, and demanded the extermination of Gypsies and Jews. Many German people were forced to comply, as they could be punished by their disobedience, which often lead to severe consequences, such as death, or being treated the same as inferior races, leading to the concentration camps (which ultimately lead to death). Through the policies encated by the government, the Nazi party was able to influence the public thinking, as during their reign, the Germany people were convinced, and grew accustomed to the idea that they were the superior race, thus changing their social values. As the Nazi held more frequent gatherings in the central square of Berlin, more citizens of the German people showed up, and this attested to the prevalent social notion during the time that the German people were the aryan race. Thus, by enacting and implementing laws, the Nazi government was able to change the social values of many of the German people. The laws of a society can change social values depending on whether or not disobedience of these laws lead to severe consequences. If the punishment for the infraction of a law is not severe, as in the case of Martin Luther King, where he was only thrown in jail for not adhereing to the law, then social values are independent of the law. The laws of America during the 1950’s were unsucessful in changing the social values of the African American community in the United States, as many were active participants in protests against the law. Their non-conformity to these set of prescribed rules indicates that the laws of American were unable to change the social values of black citizens during the time. On the otherhand, if disobedience of a law leads to severe consequences, as defined as death, the governmental laws of a nation exerts considerable influence on changing the social values of citizens, as the severe consequences induces an individual to change their pereception out of fear. This is demonstrated by the ruling of the Nazi political party, as they were able to change and convince many citizens of Germany, to a belief which asserted that the German people who superior to all others. Thus, in this instance the use of severe consequences for disobeying the law was able to induce and change values prevalent in society. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey's Anatomy Posted July 3, 2011 Report Share Posted July 3, 2011 -clicked- Most advertising is designed to prevent consumers from making rational choices. Describe a specific situation in which advertising does or might help consumers make rational choices. Discuss what you think determines whether or not advertising prevents customers from making rational choices. In today's world, media and advertising have a substantial influence on people's decisions. Advertisements are generally targeted towards a specific audience, or customers, whom the companies hope to attract. Often, advertisements depict supernatural or extraordinary events that influence the customers' psyche, consequently affecting their ability to make rational choices. For instance, the deodorant and body spray brand, Axe, is well-known for its advertisements that display increased attraction towards women upon using their product. The advertisement demonstrates a young man using Axe deodorant and body spray, causing the nearby women to irresistibly run toward the man. Such an advertisement causes the viewers and potential customers to believe in the possibilities resulting from using the product, suggesting that men who use their products will be able to attract women with essentially no effort. Although improbable, the customers fall prey to the design of their advertisement and may choose to purchase the product irrationally. Many other beauty and cosmetic products are advertised in a similar design, targeting a specific audience and demonstrating the drastic and positive influence the product will bring to their lives. As a result, these advertisements prevent customers from making rational choices, by believing in what they see. Although most advertising is designed to prevent customers from making rational choices, some advertising does in fact help customers make rational choices. In contrast to beauty and cosmetic products that are designed to be lucrative, other forms of advertising may not share the same intent. For example, some advertisements are solely informative and intend to teach or educate the viewers about the possible advantages or disadvantages of using a certain product or service. For example, the government funds the advertisement of encouraging Canadians to utilize the health care services that are available to them, including physiotherapy, community health care, and hospital care. Consequently, these advertisements are designed to educate and teach viewers about the benefits of regular visits to the doctor, among other advantages, to improve the quality of lives of Canadians without intending to make profits. Hence, they are in fact helping customers make rational choices. The nature and design of advertisements and companies provides insight as to whether or not they prevent customers from making rational choices. Advertisements that intend to gain profits from the customers, such as those promoting beauty and cosmetic products, often prevent customers from making rational choices. These advertisements often portray unrealistic outcomes, causing the viewers to falsely believe in the effects of the products on their lives. As a result, such advertising designs preclude customers from making rational decisions. Conversely, some other advertising is promoted by nonprofitable organizations that intend not to earn profit, but rather to educate and inform viewers regarding benefits and harms of certain products and services. Consequently, advertisements designed to purely educate the viewers rather than to seek profit may in fact help customers make rational choices. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenZino11 Posted July 4, 2011 Report Share Posted July 4, 2011 Prompt: Citizens of a democracy should always be permitted to express their opinions freely Freedom of speech is one of the most attractive and defining aspects of a democracy; the most liberal and equal type of government structure. The above statement stipulates that, regardless of the content, an individual residing in a democracy should always be permitted to express whatever is on their mind. Freedom of speech was truly one of the most important historical landmarks, paving way for a rapid increase in technology, education, and most importantly equality. Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” speech, would never have been heard by the world if freedom of speech did not exist. The dramatic changes which followed set the stage for equality and turned America towards a far more promising and peaceful future. If citizens were unable to express their opinions freely, societies in the democracies of the world would not be as successful as they are today due to civil unrest and a lack of internal cooperation. However, freedom of speech in the wrong hands can prove to be more harmful than beneficial. If citizens under a democratic government exercised their right to expressing opinions unto other citizens, to the point where individual rights are being broken, there should interference. A specific example of this is the Ku Klux Klan, who preach the superiority of white, Christians, and verbally and physically assault the minority groups. In expressing their opinions on the hate they feel for these minority groups, they are breaking individual rights to peace. The Klan should be disallowed from speaking on such matters as it serves no beneficial purpose but to deter and impede the lives of others. Citizens of a democracy should, for the most part, be allowed to express their thoughts and opinions. For the most part, conflicting opinions and thoughts are what cause advancements in all areas of study and life. To repress opinions would be to reduce equality which would never be beneficial to a country, as advancement requires cooperation. Opinions should be repressed if they result in the compromise of other democratic rights, as they serve no purpose towards advancing society. Ultimately, it is overall more important to preserve the right to freedom of speech, however if disruptive enough to the law and society, some citizens should be withheld from that basic right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey's Anatomy Posted July 4, 2011 Report Share Posted July 4, 2011 ^ you should probably read this: http://www.premed101.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51813 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mangos Posted July 4, 2011 Report Share Posted July 4, 2011 --clicked--- Advances in communication have led to a loss of personal privacy. Society today is driven by technological advances and as such, various aspects have continually improved in areas such as communication. Communication has been made more efficient, accessible, easier, and faster. However, these benefits come at the cost of the loss of personal privacy. A prime example of this can be seen upon the emergence of social networking group Facebook. With the introduction of Facebook, communication has been made easy, fast, and accessible. People are able to communicate with others instantaneously through Facebook Chat, a program built in that allows messages to be sent to the recipient immediately. Leaving messages on the “wall” of friends is possible with just the click of one button. Facebook has made it possible to connect with people around the world in an instant. However, despite these benefits, many law suits have been made in regards to the personal privacy of Facebook’s members. Upon registering, Facebook requires some personal information such as one’s name, age, gender, location, etc. This information, many claim, is then given to advertising companies on Facebook, thus leading to a loss of personal privacy. As a result, Facebook has recently increased their security and added privacy options that members can now change. Evidently, despite the advanced technology that Facebook uses in enhancing communication, there is the inherent risk of the loss of personal privacy. However, advances in communication do not always lead to the loss of personal privacy. As long as it does not involve the sharing of personal information, the risk of the intrusion of privacy is absent. Skype, for example, is a form of communication that allows one to make calls from one’s computer to a landline phone or from computer to computer. In addition, it also has the feature of video conferences, allowing one to see who they are talking to. With this advancement in technology, many indivudals and business are able to communicate with one other with ease and versatility. However, unlike Facebook, Skype does not require one to divulge personal information. Thus, it does not have the effect of privacy infringement as Facebook does. What determines whether advances in communication will affect personal privacy depends on whether the divulgence of personal information is required or not. In regards to a social networking site like Facebook, personal information such as name, sex, gender are required upon registering. Thus, Facebook has a greater susceptibility for privacy infringement. In contrast, Skype, while achieving the same benefits of enhanced communication, does not require personal information. As a result, the loss of privacy does not occur with Skype. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mangos Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 --clicked-- A leader cannot act fairly and at the same time please everyone. In a democratic government, political leaders are elected by their constiuents and thus, have a responsibility to them and the society in which they live. It is expected of these leaders to act fairly, which can be described as performing their duties to the utmost of their ability. One of these duties as a leader is to care for the welfare of the nation. Unfortunately, there are times when acting fairly for the welfare of the nation can lead to some disapproval amongst citizens. A prime example of this is the recent “back to work bill” introduced by the Conservative government led by Prime Minister Steven Harper. Prior to the introduction of this bill, Canada Post employees’ union tried to negotiate a new deal in regards to their wages and pensions. An agreement could not be made so Canada Post employees went on strike. Mail was no longer delievered and this affected many small business in Canada. Seeing this a possible catalyst to another economic recession, Harper introduced the “back to work bill.” This “back to work bill” would effectively force Canada post employees back to work, ending their strike and further negotiations with Canada Post. However, this bill did not meet the requirments that these employees were asking from their employer in reagrds to pension and wages. Thus, many employees were outraged at the bill, stating it was curbing their freedom as workers and union members. On the other hand, this bill had to be enacted as the Canada’s economy was in jeopardy. As can be seen in this situation, a leader cannot act fairly and please everyone at the same time. However, it is possible for leaders to act fairly and please everyone. This occurred when Ralph Klein was still premier of Alberta. In 2005, Alberta had seen a huge boost in its economy due to the rising oil industry, resulting in a surplus in the Alberta budget. Realizing that this economic boost was in part due to the hard work of Alberta, Klein distributed this surplus amongst Albertans in the form of cheques and all Albertans received $400 in the mail. Consequently, there was great praise amongst Albertans for Klein’s decision to give back to his constituents. It is evident in this situation that a leader can act fairly and please his constituents. What determines whether it is possible for a leader to act fairly and please everyone or not depends on whether the act contradicts the views of his constiuents. In the case of Harper’s introduction of the “back to work bill” for Canada Post workers, this act contradicted the views of employees by imposing regulations that did not meet their requirements. In fact, the issued wage was to be lower than what union members were asking. Thus, controversy sparked and Canada Post employees showed great outrage at the bill. Evidently, despite Harper’s attempt to act fairly and for the benefit of the Canadian economy, not everyone was pleased by the enactment of the “back to work bill.” In contrast, Klein was able to act fairly and please his constiuents because every Albertan believed that the economic surplus of Alberta should be given back to Albertans. With this in mind, Premier Klein did so and was met with much praise. thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
howdypartner Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 --clicked--(nice idea btw) i ran out of time on this one. changed my ideas half way through...please let me know your thoughts thanks Price is not necessarily a reflection of value Many have subscribed to the doctrine that if they paid a certain price for a particular product, the amount they paid will correlate to that product's value. In this context, value is understood to mean utility, the ability to fulfil the function that the product is meant to provide. However it is important to note that the price of a product is not necessarily an indicator of the product's value. This is especially true when there are many similar, yet differently priced, alternatives to certain product that all for the most part carry out the same function. Take for example the multitude of handbags that are on the market, ranging from $5 to $5000, all of which serve the same basic function- to carry one's belongings. A Gucci handbag may retail for several thousands of dollars, but it provides the same functionality and thus value as a handbag selling at the local drugstore for merely a few dollars. Therefore in this case, it is apparent that price is not always a reflection of a product's utility, and thus function. However, in certain instances, a product's price does reflect it's utility. This is the case when there are not various similar substitutes to a product available on the market. Take for instance official SAT practice tests, released by the board that runs the SAT test, a test high school students are required to take to gain acceptance into various colleges in the United States. These tests are purchased by students to prepare for the test and get a gauge of what the actual test will be like. Because these practice tests are released by the same board that runs the SATs they closely mirror the experience of the actual test, a feeling that other companies cannot produce because as they do not create the official test. Thus, in this case because only one organization is able to make the product, price will be a reflection of the product’s function, as it is the only product available that fulfils the function at task. Thus, we cannot simply assert in all cases that the price of an object does not reflect its value, or utility. This will only be the case when we are considering high-end brand name products that provide the same function that similar and considerably cheaper products also provide. This is apparent in the case of the Gucci handbags versus those made by a less well-known designer. Although the Gucci bags are much more expensive, the value they provide is the same, as they both are effective at being handbags. However, when considering items, for which there are no similar alternatives, the price of these objects are often a reflection of their value. Consider the official SAT practice tests that only one company is able to produce, and thus they are no cheaper alternatives for. In this case price does reflect value, because it is the only product that is able to provide a particular function. Ultimately price will not reflect value for a product when there are many similar and differently priced substitutes for that product; however if there are no other alternatives available for a product, price will reflect that object’s value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bored Posted July 5, 2011 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 -Clicked- The study of history is more an art than a science. The study of history relies on deducing things from observations and artifacts collected from the era. This is very similar to what a scientist does. However there is a major difference between a historian and a scientist. The historian provides us with a theory based on his beliefs and experiences. This makes his theory a subjective theory which has no way of being proved. We of the modern era can never really know what the people of the past were thinking and what their motives were, we can only deduce from the writings and art of observers. This subjective nature of the study of history places it in the category of art. We all know the famous story of Ceaser, the man who turned Rome into a dictatorship. He overthrew his fellow friend and politician and took over the roman provinces. Historians argue as to the reason for his betrayal, many accuse Ceaser’s friends to have provoked him. Other’s say that it was Ceaser’s intention to take over Rome from the moment he joined the military. Both sides have much evidence to support their argument. But no matter how convincing the evidence may be, one can never really guess what was going in the mind of Ceaser. As we have learned from modern science, that the human consciousness is a weird place, and even more doubting is the fact that many chemicals known as hormones and even the sub consciousness has much effect on our actions. Because of the questioning nature of the study of history, it is very difficult to see it as being part of science. Science is the use of observations to prove a theory. This theory may only be proven granted that there is tremendous amount of evidence supporting it. One branch of history involves with the use of DNA technology to trace back genealogy to find the true ancestors of a person. This branch uses science and uses the techniques of science to verify a theory. A theory which is produced by a historian. The art portion of study of history provides us with many theories, while the scientific portion of history helps us to verify the theories. It can be said that the study of history is a form of art because it is subjective. However, when objective measures are used in this study of history, it becomes a form of science. The End Thanks for grading it, dam my essay looks so tiny.. only 366 words. Should I have added anotehr example? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaInhaler Posted July 6, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 -clicked- This is the first essay I have written from TPR book and I ensured that I did it in the 30min time span. I am writing my MCAT mid August. Any feedback would be great. Politician’s should live by a stricter ethical code than other people. Politian’s are elected to represent communities on the municipal, state, and national level . In essence, a politician’s role revolves around implementing legislature that best supports the need, safety, and well-being of a particular region. In some cases, a politicians actions, both within their private and professional life, are heavily scrutinized and analyzed by the public. Behaviors that contradict what is accepted by the general public as consistent with an ethical code create a lot of backlash for these public figures. Since politicians are elected to represent a large population of people, it is fair to expect that these individuals should generally lead noble lives and set a good example for the citizens of the region they represent. In many cases, politicians should be expected to adhere to a stricter ethical code than other people, but there are instances were this is not always necessary, nor appropriate. There are times when politicians will need to break certain moral and ethical codes to serve their duty of supporting the need, safety, and well being of those that they represent. For example, the president of the United States of America Barak Obama has received major backlash for not revealing the death of Osama Bin Laden until months after the event. Many people would argue that by not releasing such pertinent information regarding the ongoing war on terrorism, the president has broken his ethical duty to be honest with the citizens of the United States. However, in this incident and with other withheld information surrounding the involvement of the US in the Middle-East, the president strayed away from following a very strict ethical code in favour of ensuring that certain information is kept from the public to ensure public safety and progress in international interventions. Thus, it can be seen that in the majority of cases politicians should be expected to abide by a stricter ethical code than the citizens of the country they represent. Politicians have been elected to represent the people and the laws of a particular region and should uphold the laws and ethical code they wish to instill in the public by actively living by it. There are however situations that may cause politician’s to practice ethically questionable behaviors such as withholding information from the public in favor of national security and for the long-term well-being of the regions they represent. Thanks for clicking. Appreciated. Adequate control of language. Evidence of some clarity of thought. Ideas are somewhat developed. You will need to elaborate more on the connection of your example to the idea of ensuring public safety and progress in international interventions. You will need to elaborate more on the ideas in paragraph #3 as task#3 was not fully addressed. I feel this essay will be scored an: JKLMN/OPQRST Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaInhaler Posted July 6, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 <clicked>New technologies often hide problems that are only revealed later. Describe a specific situation in which the benefits of a new technology might not hide later problems. Discuss what you think determines when the benefits of a new technology outweigh potential problems. New technologies often hide problems that are only revealed later. Describe a specific situation in which the benefits of a new technology might not hide later problems. Discuss what you think determines when the benefits of a new technology outweigh potential problems. Although it is ideed true that most new technologies hide problems that become clear later, this is not true for all technologies. The above prompt however, uses the word hide in a vague manor. In the context of technological innovations, hidden problems are problems that are not evident at the begining of use. Furthermore, the prompt is summerized to say that new technologies have problems that initally are not apparent, but after further use, are very clear. Coal power plants are an example of a technology that when initally used, did not produce major problems. These power plants provide a great amount of energy by the burning of coal, which is a fossil fuel formed by the laying of plant matter for centuries. In the begining, coal buring in power plants was not seen as a threat to the environment. Since low levels of CO2 emissions have little effect on the massive atmosphere, coal power plants hide the problem of C02 emissions in the atmosphere. However, after prolonged usage and decades of CO2 emissions, the large amount of CO2 emitted by coal power plants began to accumulate and the effects where much more hazardous. Analysts did not initally see coal power plants as dangerous to the environment because the problem of CO2 emissons only becomes evident at large levels. In this case, the coal power plants hide the problem of greenhouse gases and later reavealed it. However, in the case of CO2 scrubbers, problems were not hidden but rather they made problems more apparent. CO2 scrubbers are a new technology that is used to remove CO2 from the atomosphere. The inventors first presented the scubbers to international environmnetal organizations with all the down side of the machine. They documented its emissions, effects on the environment, and the sound level it makes. Furthermore, the invention was also presented with the amounts of CO2 it removed from the atomosphere per hour when placed near a coal power plant. This made a clear statement to the international organizations about the huge amounts of CO2 that are in the atmosphere and that are produced by coal power plants. In this case, the technology did not hide any problems. Wheather or not the new technolgy hides problems depends on the intentions of its invention. If the technology was intevented to help the environment, as in the case of CO2 srubbers, the the technology does not hide anything. If the technology was intevented for profits and ecomomics, as in the case of coal power plants, then it does hide problems. Thanks for clicking. Appreciated. Adequate control of language. Some issues with clarity of thought and integration. For the second example, you will need to show a technology that may not hide later problems. What this means is that you have a technology with apparent problems right from the beginning. It might be something of a minor issue, but it is an issue nonetheless, and the inventors know about it, but will live with it anyway. Why might they do so? It is because the benefits of the invention in the long-term are so great that they easily eclipse any ill effects that the technology may introduce. Because task#3 also depends on the successful completion of task#2, task#3 was not adequately addressed. I feel this essay will be scored an: JKLMNOPQRST Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaInhaler Posted July 6, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 -Clicked- Punishment should fit the crime. Describe a specific situation in which punishment should not fit the crime. Discuss what you think determines whether or not punishment should fit the crime. Laws are designed to impose restrictions on ones’ actions in order to protect the safety and rights of other individuals. Crimes are considered to be actions that are against the law. As such, individuals are punished for committing such actions. Moreover, punishment for crimes is a form of negative punishment from a psychological perspective. The ideal goal of punishment is to deter an individual from repeating the crime again as well as to deter others from committing such a crime. Crimes can take various different forms and are committed on various different levels. For instance, shoplifting and murder are both forms of crime but the former is a small crime with a smaller potential for harm to others whereas, the latter is a large crime that hold significant potential for harm to others. Due to such variations in the form and scale of a crime, many believe that punishment should fit the crime. For example, Colonel Russell Williams held a high ranking position in the Canadian army. He was recently convicted for several counts of breakins into private property, theft of personal belongings, sexual assualt to various women and murder. He is an adult who also held a high ranking position in the army, thereby having the capacity to make appropriate decisions. Therefore, his punishment should fit the crime he has committed. In fact, he was recently convicted of all charges and was courtmarshalled from his position in the army, and has been placed behind bars for life. On the other hand, it is not always necessary for the punishment to fit the crime. This is especially true if the crime has been committed by a child, under the age of 18. In the western society, individuals under the age of 18 are not considered to be mature enough to be able to make appropriate decisions. Therefore, the Youth Justice Act and the Restorative Justice System in Canada often uses alternative measures of punishment for youth who have committed a crime, regardless of the nature and degree of the crime committed. Such youth are allowed to live within a social setting of a community, attend school and alternative forms of punishment including community service hours are often used. In this case, youth under the age of 18 are not considered to have the capacity to be able to make appropriate decisions. Thus, these youth are afforded the opportunity of a second chance to learn from their mistakes and to reintegrate back into society. In conclusion, punishment for a crime is necessary to deter the individual from repeating the crime as well as to deter others from attempting to commit such a crime. For a punishment to be fair, it should fit the crime. This is especially true for adults since they hold the ability to make appropriate decisions and should be held accountable for their actions. This was seen in the case of Colonel Russell Williams who was charged and convicted for breakins into private property, theft of personal belongings, sexual assault and murder of numerous women. He has been punished for his actions since he has been court-marshaled from his position in the army and has been placed behind bars for life, without parole. In this case, Colonel Williams is an adult who held a high status position in the Canadian army which illustrates that he had the capacity to make appropriate decisions. Therefore, his punishment should fit the crime as was seen in his conviction. In contrast, it is not necessary for the punishment to fit the crime if that crime is committed by a child, under the age of 18. Children do not have the capacity to make appropriate decisions and they should not be held accountable for their actions. The Youth Justice Act and the Restorative Justice System in Canada provides youth under the age of 18 who have committed a crime with a second chance. As such, their punishment does not necessarily need to fit the crime they have commited, but rather provide them with the opportunity of a second chance to improve and reintegrate back into the community. Thanks You're welcome. Thanks for clicking. Appreciated. Good control of language. Proficiency in responding to the tasks. Evidence of clarity and complexity of thought. You can further strengthen your ideas in paragraph#2 by providing examples of crimes committed by young offenders and their associated punishments under the Youth Criminal Justice Act. I feel this essay will be scored an: JKLMNOPQRST Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaInhaler Posted July 6, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 -Clicked- Governments have the duty to impose social responsibilities on businesses. Describe a specific situation in which government should not impose social responsibility on a business. Discuss what you think determines when governments should impose social responsibilities on businesses and when they should not. Governments have been put into place to ensure the safety, well-being and best interests of a majority of individuals in society. Moreover, businesses are operated with a goal of maximizing profits. However, businesses also hold many social responsibilities including ensuring welfare of the citizens in the community in which it serves. Therefore, since government holds an authoritative power, it is the government’s duty to impose social responsibilities on business. The government should impose social responsibilities on large scale businesses that have a profound presence within the community and also holds the potential to make a significant contribution to society. For example, Tim Hortons is a large scale business in Canada that specializes in fast food. It has a branch on every major corner in Canada. Moreover, it also makes billions of dollars in profits annually. Thus, it holds a significant potential to affect society and it is the government’s duty to impose social responsibilities on such a business. Some examples of social responsibilities include meeting appropriate health and safety standards and to also play a major role in comminity programs. As a result, Tim Hortons sponsors and funds kids camps during the summer and kids ice hockey during the winters. It also strives to provide good quality food and beverages that meet the health and safety standards as stated by the Food Inspection Agency in Canada. On the other hand, governments should not impose social responsibilities on small scale businesses. These businesses include those that do not have a profound presence within a given region and make small amounts of profits. Thus, they do not hold a significant potential of influencing the community. One such example is that of Rabba Foods which is a small scale grocery store with a few branches in selected parts of Ontario. This company makes a modest amount in profit and thus, does not hold the potenial to greatly affect the community at large. In fact, many Canadians are not even aware of such a business due to its relative small scale. In conclusion, governments hold social, economic and political ties with many businesses. As such, it is the duty of the government to impose social responsibilities on the businesses, on the behalf of the citizens. This is especially true in the case of large scale businesses that hold great presence and potential to affect society. This was clearly seen in the example of Tim Hortons that has a profound presence in Canada and makes billions of dollars annually. Thus, it is the government’s responsibility to impose social responsibilities on this large scale business to ensure that ceratin safety and health standards are met and that community programs are also funded. On the other hand, government should not impose social responsibilities on small scale businesses that do not have a profound presence in a given region and does not have significant monetary tunrovers. This was clearly seen in the example of Rabba Foods which is a small scale grocery chain in some parts of Ontario. It has a few franchise branches and makes a modest amount in profit. Thus, it does not hold a significant potential to affect the community at large. Thanks You're welcome. Thanks for clicking. Appreciated. Adequate control of language. Evidence of some clarity of thought. Demonstrates proficiency in responding to the tasks. I feel this essay will be scored a: JKLMNOPQ/RRST Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slumdogMD Posted July 6, 2011 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 <clicked> Education comes not from books but from practical experience. Write a unified essay in which you perform the following tasks. Explain what you think the above statement means. Describe a specific situation in which books might educate students better than practical experience. Discuss what you think determines when practical experience provides a better education than books do. Education is taught in a variety of ways. Sometimes the most effective way of teaching is through books while other times, practical experience proves to be far more effective. Practical expericences, in the context of education, is the hands on use of tools related to a field of work. Books is essentially the theory based approach to explaining concepts. Furthermore, the prompt means that books teach students better than practical experience. An example is the study of mathematics. Many universities have programs dedicated to the in-dept study of calculas, statistics, and other theory based maths. Mathematics often uses theoretical abstract symbols and variables in order to explain complex relationships and the connections between them. To understand these symbols, universities ask students to purchase large text books filled with examples and definitions of variables.Additionally, little class time is given to practical application of the mathematics because the feild does not require students to be proficient in applying the concepts in order to be sucessful in their career. In this case, because the study of mathematics is involved heavily in theoretical concepts, the best way of teaching students is through books and not practical experience. However, in the case where hands on experience is need to suceed in a particular activity, practical experience teaches better than books. Take for example carpentry. Colleges around the country offer carpentry course to students interesting in becoming carpenters. The curriculum is based mainly on workshop classes and hours of hands on work with wood with little emphasis on theory based learning from books. Since the occupation of carpentry is itself physically involved, students learn best by being physically involved with the materials they will be using during their career. Colleges understand this and put little emphasis on teaching out of text books. In this case, because carpentry is based more on hands on work rather than theoretical concepts, practical experience is the best way of teaching students. Whether or not practical experience or books provides the best education depends on the types of career the student is pursuing. If the student is pursuing a career in a theory based field, such as in the case of mathematics, then books are the better mode of education. However, if the student is pursuing a career in a physical and hands on occupation, such as in the case of carpentry, then practical experience is the better mode of education. It should be noted that some occupations involve both theory and practical applications. An example is surgery. Surgery requires students to study the theoretical aspects of the respiratory systems, circulatory system, and excretory system of the human body from text books. Additionally, in order for a surgeon to actually carry out surgeries, practical applications involving how to use tools and how to cut in precise manor is equally necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mangos Posted July 6, 2011 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 --clicked-- In politics, campaign promises are seldom kept after the election is won. In a democratic society, leaders are elected by the general public in which everyone has a voice. As such, it is of no surprise that candidates strive to appease the majority of voters as possible during their electoral campaign in order to harbor the most support possible. This is usually done by way of proposing promises that he or she will fulfill if elected to power. However, it is not uncommon to see these promises, which can be termed “empty promises,” unfulfilled after the election is won. A prime example of this is when Barack Obama, now the President of the United States, was running for presidency against Hillary Clinton. During his campaign, Obama vowed to improve the health care system, making it equally accessbible to everyone. This promise offered to the American public during his campaign found great favour amongst them. It gave citizens a new life to look forward to, and thus, Obama was voted into presidency. However, from the day of his appointment till now, this promise has been fulfilled. Several complications have arisen that Obama could not foresee. One of them being the economic recession which devastated the US economy, making radical improvements to the health care system out of reach. As can be seen, Obama’s race for presidency is a definitive example of where promises become “empty promises,” unfulfilled, and before long, may be forgotten. In contrast, there are times in which candidates actually fulfill their promises made to the electorate during their campaign. During Steven Harper’s run to be Prime Minister of Canada, he vowed to the Canadian citizens to reduce the Goods and Services Tax (GST) which had previously been introduced under Brian Mulroney’s government. This tax effectively took 7% off of all sales and would become a source of revenue for the Canadian government. Upon its enactment, there was mass disapproval across the nation. Realizing this, Jean Chretien, during his time as Prime Minister, even tried to abolish this tax, unfortunately, without success. However, Harper, made a promise to the Canadians during his campaign that he would reduce this tax from its original 7% to 6% and then further down to 5%. It is of no surprise that this promise appealed to the mass majority of Canadians and thus, Harper was voted to become Canada’s next Prime Minister. During his term, Harper did in fact fulfill his promise and this is why, to this day, GST is only at 5% instead of its original 7%. As can be seen, during political campaigns, several promises are made by candidates in hopes of gaining favor of the majority. However, there are times when these promises are not fulfilled and there are times when they are. What determines whether these promises are fulfilled depends on the scope of the promise. Promises, such as Obama’s, to improve health care are a nationwide radicalization that involves many factors than just the approval of a bill. Factors such as the health of the economy, funding for the enactment of a new health care plan, the type of plan, etc.. must all be considered. Unfortunately, for Obama, the economic recession effectively dampened the health of the economy, making the introduction of a new health care plan out of reach. In contrast, promises that do not involve several factors which need to be considered can be fulfilled. In Harper’s case, the lowering of the GST tax from 7% to 5% involved only the enactment of a bill. Once passed, the law would come into effect and the change will have been made. This was exactly the case for Harper, and thus, he was able to fulfill his promise to Canadians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mangos Posted July 6, 2011 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 --clicked-- The role of technology should be to improve human life, but not to affect human values. Throughout history, advancements in technology have consistently improved the quality of human life without affecting human values. What was once impossible to achieve, is now possible through technology. For example, today, we can instantly talk to anyone in the world due to the introduction of social networking sites and radical improvements in medical care are attributed to the invention of Magnetic Resonance Images (MRI). Evidently, technology has improved human life. A definitive example can be seen with the recent invention of what is termed the “smart phone.” These phones allow owners to perform various tasks on it simultaneously such as email, listen to music, watch videos, and play games- all without taking away from the basic function of making a call. Our lives have been made more efficient and convenient by the invention of these “smart phones,” as now, many people can do business on the road due to the ability to be able to check emails, students can study on their phone due to the ability of phones to be able to display documents, and children can play games. It is evident, that by the introduction of these “smart phones,” human life has been improved in ways of efficiency and convenience. In contrast, there are cases in which the role of technology not only improves human life but also affects human values. Human values are usually instilled in people by way of religion and become the main basis by which individuals make certain decisions. If a decision conflicts with their personal values, they may oppose it and similarly, if it is in line with their values, they may support it. A prime example of a situation in which the role of technology affects human values is the invention of drugs and medical procedures that allowed females to get abortions. Abortion, a widely debated topic, is a view that, depending on one’s values, one would support or disprove of. In fact, abortion is such a widely contested topic that even during the recent presidential elections, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama used the support or disapproval of abortion as one of their platform policies. Those who do not support abortion because of their personal values, such as religion, would see the invention of these procedures as affecting their human value. For example, it is argued that those who are victims of rape should be allowed to undergo the abortion procedure. However, if one who is originally opposed to the idea of abortion is a victim of rape, the invention of abortion procedures will effectively affect their human values. In contrast, one whose human vales support the idea of abortion, may immediately undergo abortion and be very pleased with the invention of this procedure as her life has now been improved. Evidently, invention of new technology can not only improve human life, but also affect human values. What then determines whether technology only improves human life or if it also affects human values as well? If the role of technology is primarily to make life more efficient and convenient, it will only improve human life. In the case of the invention of “smart phones,” life was improved as emailing, wathching videos, and playing games could all be done on one device. However, if the role of technology goes beyond making life more efficient and convenient but instead, crosses into an area that may conflict with one’s religion, then this technology would affect human values. In the case of the invention of new abortion procedures, many people are opposed to abortion due to values instilled into them through their religion. As such, through the invention of these procedures would affect their human values. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beanbeans Posted July 6, 2011 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 Hi There, I would REEAAAALLY appreciate it if you could mark one, or both of these essays Wealthy Politicians cannot offer fair representation to all the people. A politician is an elected individual who has run a campaign and on the basis of his or her political promises, has won a majority vote in any given community. The best politician in a riding is one that can most identify with the people who have elected him. This is why in the poorest, most violent and impoverished areas, politicians who have been raised in a families where finances have never been a issue cannot possibly represent such a community appropriately and fairly. Money can bring happiness. It can provide proper nutrition, a prestigious education, maintenance of mental and physical health, among other things. Realistically, a wealthy politician who has always had the best of what life has to offer, could not relate to his communities’ needs, nor could he understand why the members of this community live in such dire situations in the first place. It is possible however, for a politician who came from simple beginnings and has managed to create his own wealth to go back to such a community, and represent it genuinely, with fairness. This politician would be able to understand and identify with the members of the community. Through past experiences or relationships, this politician would be able to understand the poverty, lack of education, cycles of domestic abuse, substance abuse, and the mental and physical illnesses that are very much present in the lives of individuals who live in the poorest communities. It would be this ability to relate and to understand that would motivate the politician to bring positive change to this community and help its members change their lives. He or she would be able to speak from personal experience and the members of the community would be more inclined to cooperate and learn from someone who honestly knew what it was like to live a day in their shoes. Ultimately, it is the relationships, life experiences, and ability to relate with the people that the politician represents that will determine whether or not a wealthy politician can or cannot offer fair representation to the people. Engaging with community members from different levels of income similar or different from what he is accustomed to, would provide a well-rounded and open-minded politician who could learn from even the most impoverished community to identify with them and thus offer a fair representation of their needs on a political level. In a free society, laws must be subject to change A free society has a democratic constitution, in which laws and policies have been put into place and are to be followed by the citizens to ensure order and stability. However, in a free society, where norms, values, politics and economy is constantly changing, there are instances when these laws must be revised or changed completely in order to protect the rights and to serve best interests of the majority of the population. On the other hand, there are certain laws that should not be changed in a free society. These are the laws adhere to human rights. Laws that protect an individuals’ human rights should never be changed. The constitution has been put in place for a reason, and it is through the hard work, perseverance and integrity in the face of adversity of heroic individuals that human rights for every individual have been created. The abolishment of slavery gave human rights and equality to the black people of North America. It was a long and hard fight that took decades. In many areas, the discrimination of blacks is an issue that is still being improved upon. If laws regarding human rights and freedoms changed, there would be an uproar amongst the people. Chaos would propagate and national instability would flourish. For example in the middle east at the beginning of the year 2011, the people of Egypt organized an uprising against their country’s leader. Finally, they grew tired enough of their lack of freedom and human rights that they are now fighting and risking their lives for a change in the laws and politics in their country. They too, like in North America, want to be a free society with human rights and freedoms for each individual. Because human rights are so personal to every individual, laws that protect them should never be changed. If a law in a free society can be changed for the betterment of the people and can bring about equality and support for an individuals human rights, then these laws should be changed. For example, changing laws to abolish the slave trade benefitted the entire black population and brought forth equality and modernity to North America. It has brought stability and unity. Like the evolution of species, some laws cannot remain stagnant, but instead should adapt to better suit the population as a whole. For these laws that are intimately close to the hearts of the people and have been established for a reason– the laws that so many individuals had to fight so hard for and which required so many sacrifices, these laws should not be changed - such as the laws that protect an individuals human rights and freedoms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey's Anatomy Posted July 6, 2011 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 -clicked- Education makes everyone equal. Write a unified essay in which you perform the following tasks. Explain what you think the above statement means. Describe a specific situation in which education does not make everyone equal. Discuss what you think determines whether or not education makes everyone equal. Education serves an important role in society by teaching students valuable knowledge and skills in order to foster knowledgeable and creative minds. The type of education, however, differs under distinct circumstances. For example, parents teaching their children about values and scruples can be regarded as education. Additionally, the knowledge acquired in school for various subjects is the common definition of education. Some forms of education, such as those delivered in public schools, aim to teach students from a specific curriculum regarding the workings of the world. For example, Marc Garneau Collegiate Institute in Toronto has exceptional departments in science and mathematics that promote creativity and help students grow into talented and brilliant individuals. Education provided in a public setting is accessible to everyone and offers fundamental knowledge that is widely agreed-upon in society. The knowledge gained in a public setting is often objective and minimally prone to bias. As a result, in this context, students receive equal education regarding facts that are rarely disputable, making everyone receiving the education equal. While some forms of education make everyone equal, education provided in a private setting often fosters certain values and spiritual beliefs. For instance, the faith-based Islamic School of Toronto not only educates children about the workings of the world as in public schools, but also aspires to educate students about faith and spirituality. These concepts of discussion are personal and subjective, thus prone to bias. For example, students in Islamic school are taught to respect the opinions, privacy and security of others, while protecting the religion from harm. However, owing to misinterpretations of the text of the Holy Quran, some people believe different values and do not act in accordance with the teachings of the religion. Hence, the education received in private schools is often subjective and open to interpretation, making everyone receiving the education unequal. In conclusion, education is an integral part of society as it allows its members to integrate into and contribute to society. Education that is objective and minimally susceptible to bias, such as the knowledge acquired in public schools, makes everyone equal. This form of education is often considered to provide facts and teach indisputable concepts. Conversely, education that is subjective and prone to bias and interpretation, such as the knowledge provided in private schools, does not make everyone equal. While this form of education hopes to teach certain values and scruples, there is room for interpretation within each student. As a result, education in such an environment does not make everyone equal. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mangos Posted July 8, 2011 Report Share Posted July 8, 2011 --clicked-- Only those politicians who have learned the art of compromise can achieve their goal In a democratic society, politicians are voted into power by their consituents who all have an equal voice. As such, it is of no surprise that the main goal of candidates during their election campaign is to harbor the support of the majority of voters. Sometimes this may involve introducing policies and promises that may contradict with what one personally believes, or even the views of citizens, in order to achieve one's political goal. Thus, many politicians, in their attempts to achieve their goals, must compromise. A prime example of this was seen in Steven Harper's run to become Prime Minister of Canada. His main campaign platform was to reduce the Goods and Services Tax (GST), which had intitially been introduced by Brian Mulroney during his time as Prime Minister, from its original 7% to 6% and then further down to 5%. The introduction of the GST was met with mass displeasement amongst Canadians as it would effectively add an additional 7% to all sale prices of items, effectively making Canadians pay more than the listing price. Realizing how Canadians felt about the GST, Harper vowed to reduce the tax during his campaign. However, in making this promise, it was well known that Harper would have to compromise on the economic budget for Canada. By reducing the GST, a source of revenue for the government, it would effectively put Canada into more debt that it already is. Despite this knowledge, Harper decided to make this compromise to please his voters. As a result, he found great favor amongst Canadians and achieved his politcal goal, becoming the next Prime Minister of CAnada, at the expense of the Canadian budget. However, there are cases when politicans can achieve their political goal without compromising. These politicans believe achieving their goal is solely within their control and thus, compromising and relying on others is not effective. A definitive example of this was the enactment of the War Measure Act in 1970 during the October Crisis by Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau. During this time, Quebec Nationalists and members of the FLQ, who believed in the seperation of Quebec from Canada, endgangered Canadians by placing explosives in mailboxes, kidnapping, and even commiting murder. Citizens of Quebec began to fear a militant uprising against the government of Canada. As the situation in Quebec continued to spiral out of control, Trudeau immediately enacted the War Measures Act. This act effectively curbed all freedom from Canadian citizens and extended the powers of the police to the point where they could arrest and detain anyone suspected of being involved with the FLQ without charge. Up until the time Trudeau decided to impose the WMA, many Canadians disagreed with his resolution to this crisis claiming that individual rights should never be curbed. Despite the public outcry against the WMA, Trudeau continued according to his plan and imposed the WMA. Ultimately, it led to the end of the crisis and renewal of public safety in the streets of Quebec. As can be seen, in this situation, Trudeau did not compromise to achieve his politacal goal of ending the reign of terror by the FLQ. Whether politicans should practice the art of compromise to achieve their political goals or not depends on whether their goal can be achieved alone or if it requires the aid of others. In the case of Harper's goal in becoming the Prime Minister of Canada, he relied on the support of his voters. As a result, compromise was necessary in order to please them and harbour their support. This is why he promised to reduce the Goods and Services Tax despite the well known effects of the damage it would have on the economic budget of Canada. On the other hand, compromise is not required when the goal to be achieved does not rely on the aid of others. Trudeau's goal was the end the civil unrest caused the Quebec Nationalist and the FLQ in Quebec. This goal could be achieved by him alone and did not depend on the support of Canadian citizens. Thus, Trudeau was able to impose the War Measures Act without compromising to Canadians. Ultimately, his goal was achieved and the October Crisis was subdued. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mangos Posted July 8, 2011 Report Share Posted July 8, 2011 --clicked-- Governments have a responsibility to regulate companies that provide necessary services to citizens. The role of a government within a society is to ensure the well being of the society as whole. This is achieved in many ways such as introducing and enforcing laws, providing public services to those in need, and regulating companies that provide necessary services to citizens. These necessary services include, but are not limited to, postal mail, health care, transportation, and even food. It is well known that the primary goal of any business is to make profit through their product. As such, it becomes the government's role to ensure that companies strike a necessary balance between the quality of the services they offer and the amount of profit they make. A prime example of this is the regulation of ingredients rich in trans fats used to make fast food such as burgers or fried chicken. It has been medically and clinically proven that exess dietary trans fats is the leading cause of obesity and cardiovascular diseases. However, the usage of ingredients filled with trans fats instead of, say for example extra virgin olive oil, in the making of fast food is cheaper. Thus, companies are able to invest less money in the product they produce and recieve greater return. With this in mind, several large scale fast food companies such as McDonalds and Kentucky Fried Chicken used ingredients rich in trans fats. Realizing the the detrimental effects of citizens consuming too many transfats, governments began to regulate the operations of these companies by imposing strict health guidelines on their products. In addition, it became mandatory that these companies offer healthy alternative food choices such as salads in their menus. As can be seen, companies in the fast food industry provide food which is a necesasry servies to citizens. Due to the negative impacts their products offer to the health of citizens, governments have a responsiblity to regulate these companies. However, there are cases in which governments should not regulate companies that provide necessary services to citizens. These include small scale, privately owned companies that do not possess the power to affect citizens nationwide. A prime example of this is the small business called College Pro Painters (CPP) based in Edmonton, Alberta. This business provides painting services to households in need of a new paint job, whether for the walls of their home or just backyard fence. Families nowadays are so busy earning an income while taking care of their children that a tiring, long, side project such as re-painting their fence, is out of the question. It is these families that hire CPP to come do the job for them. CPP is a business run by students and as such, due to the limited resources students have, influencing citizens nationwide is not possible. As such, although they offer necessary services to citizens, their impact is not on a nationwide scale and therefore, should not be regulated by governments. As mentioned above, one of the main roles a government plays in society is ensure the well being of the society as whole. Sometimes, in order to achieve this, governments must regulate companies that provide necessary services to citizens. However, this should not always be the case. What determines whether government regulation is necessary or not depends on scope of the effects of the service. In the case of companies in the fast food industry, they offer fast food which is a necessary service to citizens. However, many companies began to use ingredients that were medically proven to be unhealthy to citizens in attempts to gain more profit. As a result, government regulations were required and these companies must now adhere by strict health regulations regarding their product. In contrast, small businesses such as College Pro Painters offers painting servcies to its citizens. This service does not affect citizens on a nationwide scale as the business is small and its resources are limited. It follows then that businesses such as CPP should not be regul1ated. thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaInhaler Posted July 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 -clicked- Thanks PastaInhaler! Citizens who enjoy a country’s benefits during peacetime have a responsibility to support their nation in times of war. Write a unified essay in which you perform the following tasks. Explain what you think the above statement means. Describe a specific situation in which citizens might justifiably not support their nation in time of war. Discuss what you think determines whether or not citizens should support their nation in time of war. Citizens of a democracy often enjoy a nation's benefits during peacetime. These include security and welfare in the interest of country's citizenry as a whole. As a common adage suggests' date=' "A relationship involves give and take." In this context, the mutual relationship between citizens and the government should not only involve receiving benefits, but also providing support. It is often the responsibility of the constituents to support their nation in wartime. A war that is intended to provide security or protect of individuals' human rights who are living in poor and helpless situations deserves the support of citizenry in their country. For instance, one of the reasons for the War in Afghanistan is to protect the citizens of the nation from the harsh living conditions under the Taliban. The human rights of many individuals are violated. Consequently, citizens of a privileged and powerful nation have a duty to support their nation in order to improve living conditions in another country. The support of citizenry towards the government to engage in war in order to protect others from harm reflects performing our responsibility. As a result, citizens who enjoy a country's benefits during peacetime, such as security and protection of rights and freedoms, have a responsibility to support their nation in a war intended to protect others internationally. Although citizens have a duty to support their nation in certain times of war, there are instances when citizens might justifiably not support their nation in wartime. The onset of war is often characterized by disturbance of peace and tranquility. When the harmony among some citizens of a nation is disrupted, the other citizens do not have a responsibility to support their nation. For instance, during the American Civil War, conflict between certain groups spread throughout the country, endangering citizens who may or may not choose or want to be involved. Supporting the nation during this time meant that the citizens were putting themselves in danger and jeopardizing their welfare. As a result, they do not have a responsibility to support their nation in this context, as they would be further propagating the negative effects of war and conflict. Supporting the nation in wartime would mean greater disorder and movement away from peace and harmony. During peacetime, citizens of a nation enjoy many benefits that are often neglected during wartime, such as security and protection of human rights. When a nation intends to interfere in an international conflict in order to preclude violation of rights and freedoms of individuals, citizens of the country have a responsibility to offer their support. Their support, in this circumstance, would improve the quality of life of many suffering individuals. Conversely, when a civil war erupts within a nation, citizens do not have a duty to support their nation, as this would risk their own welfare and security. As a result, citizens who enjoy a country's benefits during peacetime have a responsibility to support their nations in times of war intended to protect and support the vulnerable and defenseless. On the contrary, citizens do not have a duty to support their nation in times of civil war that threatens the security and welfare of the citizens themselves.[/quote'] You're welcome. Thanks for clicking. Appreciated. Adequate control of language. Evidence of some clarity of thought. Task #1 was adequately addressed, and you were set-up for a strong essay. However, task#2 was much weaker, and consequently, task#3 was affected as well. For the counter-example, the rationale that you used could still be applied to argue against task#1. Participating in a war involves discomfort, so why did the war still go on, and why did people still support the country in the first example? You need to use a different example to argue your essay differently in the second example. Think of something that would make it right not to participate in a war. What if the war was messed up? Like the people were fighting for messed up reasons like to steal gold from people who found it? You can reasonably opt out of a war like that. That would make for a stronger example. The prompt instructions kinda give you some hints of when can you justifiably not support your nation -when the war itself is not just. I feel this essay will be scored an: JKLMNOPQRST Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaInhaler Posted July 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 -clicked- Thanks again In business' date=' competition is superior to cooperation.[/b'] Write a unified essay in which you perform the following tasks. Explain what you think the above statement means. Describe a specific situation in which cooperation might be superior to competition. Discuss what you think determines when competition is superior to cooperation in business and when it s inferior. People have explored the concept of competition versus cooperation for many years. The business world possesses many avenues, including those that are devoted to achieve technological progress, while others explore the realm of scientific progress. In some instances, competition is superior to cooperation in that it leads to better or more effective outcomes that benefit others. Competition in the technological and entertainment world often drives creativity, resulting in innovative ideas that contribute a novel idea to society. For instance, businesses in the gaming and entertainment industry often compete for designing new marketable and attractive products to consumers. As there is competition, different businesses continuously strive to make better and more appealing products. In 2010, Microsoft introduced a new gaming and entertainment system for the XBOX 360 console called Kinect. This invention builds on the traditional approach to playing video games to integrate physical activity and exercise, not only promoting physical wellness but also creating a realistic gaming experience. Upon this popular invention, other businesses are now challenged to produce even more marketable and engaging products. Consequently, competition in this context encourages creativity for advancing society technologically. While competition in business is often superior to cooperation, there are instances when the contrary is true. Cooperation might be superior to competition when businesses or institutions share a common goal. For instance, billions of dollars are spent into research and development of treatments and a potential cure for the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Sharing of information and knowledge would lead to more effective results, avoid repeating mistakes, and minimize wasting limited resources. The common goal of improving the quality of life of individuals suffering from this debilitating ailment suggests that cooperation may in fact be superior to competition. Cooperation, or striving for collective progress in the fight against HIV/AIDS, may be superior to competing for success. As a result, when businesses or companies share a common goal to meet an urgent need in society, cooperation may be superior to competition. Businesses are often faced with the question of the superiority of cooperation versus competition. In some circumstances, such as when companies compete for inventing products that serve to satisfy the wants of consumers, competition may be superior. It would lead to creativity and invention of an array of products. Cooperation in this context would suggest that there is reduced incentive to continuously invent novel products that attract consumers, in order for the business to thrive. Conversely, when businesses and institutions share a common goal of improving the quality of lives of individuals who are in dire need, cooperation may be superior to competition. This would minimize wasting of limited resources and achieving results faster by sharing knowledge with one another. As a result, businesses that aim to fulfill the wants of consumers might benefit from competition, while those that hope to achieve a common goal would benefit from cooperation. You're welcome. Thanks for clicking. Appreciated. Adequate control of language. Evidence of some clarity of thought. Demonstrates proficiency in responding to the tasks. Your score may be improved if you are able to provide a concrete example of cooperation between companies involved in HIV/AIDS research. This may be hard to come by since pharmaceutical companies are really out to beat out their competition. If one company were to find a cure for AIDS, or something to effectively counteract the virus, HIV, they would make a lot of money, more so than if they shared the product. It might be best if you had a different example, one that is more concrete, since a grader may disagree with your example. Don't sweat it, this prompt is difficult, and will trip up a lot of students. I feel this essay will be scored an: JKLMNO/PQRST Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaInhaler Posted July 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 -Clicked!- Hello PastaInhaler! I hope everything is well with you. I completed an MCAT today and would like your critique of my written samples. I appreciate your help! Prompt 1: Most advertising is designed to prevent consumers from making rational choices. Write a unified essay in which you perform the following tasks. Explain what you think the above statement means. Describe what you think determines whether or not advertising prevents consumers from making rational choices. Nowadays, fitness is an important part of our society. It influences how we feel about ourselves. If one is physically fit, then the individual is often emotionally stable. Conversely, if the individual is overweight, then he or she is often emotionally unstable - unhappy about the way they look. Some business companies use this to their advantage, advertising their fitness prorgam to primarily profit off of the consumers. For example, Beach Body is a company that advertises fitness programs on the Television, including Insanity, that lure the consumer into buying their product. Some of their mechanisms include telling the consumer how hard it is for them to find time to exercise in the gym, and how easy it is for them to lose weight by buying their product. In fact, they promise that the consumer will lose weight in a smaller amount of time compared to natural way of going to the gym and working out under the supervision of a professional trainer - the rational choice. Lured by the amount of weight that the consumer can expect to lose in as little time as 10 minutes per day for 10 weeks, compared to the usual 1 hour in the gym, the consumer sometimes makes the rash choice of buying the product, even though it is the irrational choice. However, there are advertisements on the Television as well, particularly targeted towards the youth, to participate in activities with no mention of a particular program that they can enroll in. These advertisments are mainly made by the government trying to increase the participation of youth in physical activities to halt the increasing numbers of child obesity cases. For instance, participaction, which is made by the government, advertises the importance for youth to participate in activities. A common advertisment seen on the Television is one where a group of children are trying to reach the Ice Cream truck, but they were slow runners and they got tired easily. At the end of the advertisment a message is illustrated on the screen that advocates for the well being of youth. Evidently, there are instances of advertisements that might help consumers - those who watch TV and are the target of the advertisement - to make more rational choices towards their well being. It is especially the case when the advertisement does not promote a particular product for the consumer to purchase. Therefore, whether a company is advertising their own product or a government that is advertising for the well being of its citizenry, the advertisments will have different focuses. The former will focus primarily on making profit and the latter will focus on increasing the life expactency of its citizens. It would follow, therefore, that if an advertisement is made by a business company compared to a non for profit organization, then the advertisement will be designed to blind the consumer from methods that are more rational and instead, highlight their own product to make profit. The opposite is true - if a non for profit organization is advertising, then the content of the advertisement will tend to motivate a consumer to make the rational choice towards their own well being. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm well, thank-you. Thanks for clicking. Appreciated. One essay per post please. Adequate control of language with some grammatical or usage problem. Demonstrates proficiency in responding to the tasks. Your essay may be strengthened if you provided more background info on the children's advertisement. Was it an advertisement created by Participaction, or was it Concerned Children's Advertisers, or some other organization? I feel this essay will be scored an: JKLMNOPQRST Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.