Use of 3D glasses in cinemas Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Use of 3D glasses in cinemas - Research Paper Example Cinema, as we have them in modernity today, has had its share of evolution ever since film was invented. If they were once merely dark theatres with images projected on the screen, they have now become a luxurious avenue to provide utmost entertainment.Although many of these trends have arrived in the more recent years, the use of three-dimensional (3D) glasses in cinemas had been present in the 1950s. Also, such trend is only a recurring gimmick to attract movie goers, not necessarily giving viewers the â€Å"perfect† movie experience. Binocular Vision and 3D History Stereoscopy, or 3D imaging, began with Charles Wheatstone’s discovery of binocular vision or stereopsis, defined as â€Å"the ability to use the combined points of view from the two eyes or cameras to reconstruct three-dimensional solid objects and to perceive depth,† (Mataric 114) which is the backbone principle of stereoscopic cinemas.A brief history of stereoscopic cinema as presented by Ronfard is adapted in this paper. In the 1950s, movie theater audience was significantly reduced in the emergence of the television (TV), and stereoscopic cinema became an approach to bring them back. Thus, this caused the emergence of a flock of commercial stereoscopic films during the decade, but eventually died down because of the discomfort it gives the audience. 3D movies could not surpass the value of two-dimensional (2D), because the visual quality and cinematographic content of the former, brought about by lack of mastery in stereoscopic filming techniques therefore giving viewers a headache. The 1980s was again bombarded with stereoscopic films, but was not successful as well, not until technology needed to produce quality stereoscopic films, both for shooting and viewing, arrived. Animated movies in 3D then came with lower visual strain to viewers, paving a way for new experiments on the field. Thus, this period became 3D’s rebirth, giving us what we now have today (12-14). 3D Glasses There are two most commonly used types of 3D glasses: anaglyph and polarized. Anaglyph process uses colors to encode depth, thus it can be presented with a single color print and red and blue-filtered glasses (Kennel 157). These glasses would filter out red on one lens, and blue on the other lens, creating the 3D effect similar to that in binocular vision. Anaglyphic encoding is the cheapest of all 3D systems, the most largely distributed and available, and efficient in black-and-white 3D used in depth placement and correction (Mendiburu 56). Modern types of 3D glasses are polarized glasses, nowadays used in films as well as in theme parks and rides. When using these types of glasses, â€Å"two images are projected through different polarization filters onto a surface that reflects the light toward viewers, keeping the polarization of the incoming light (mostly) unmodified† (Mrak, Grgic, and Kunt 394). Polarized glasses have been adjusted according to linear or ci rcular polarization, where the latter is preferred in order to see the same image quality despite head position changes of the viewers. An advantage of this type of glasses is its ability to block the bright glare of horizontally polarized light by transmitting it to the surface and permits vertically polarized light, which are weaker, to pass (Raymer 254). 3D Films as Gimmick Audiences are important because they are the reason a film is made, and audience size and reaction often convey the success or failure of a media product (Rayner, Wall and Kruger). In viewing media as a source of entertainment, it has given us a number of innovations that would change our media experience, particularly with the invention of film and the genius of television. In this point, 3D film viewing is presented as merely a gimmick, and not as a necessity in order to create an extraordinary movie experience that surpasses 2D. As mentioned

Comparing Millennial Generation To Boomer Essay

Comparing Millennial Generation To Boomer - Essay Example These generations constitute strong possibilities for analysis as they represent polar opposites in terms of birth, with the Baby Boomers constituting the generation born immediately after World War II and the Millennial Generation those born between 1982-2001. This essay examines these generations in terms of educational opportunities, One of the prominent areas of consideration between the Baby Boomer Generation and the Millennial Generation is the nature of educational opportunities. A notable consideration in these regards is the understanding that both generations emerged in an era of relative prosperity where pursuing higher education was not only a possibility, but an expected course of action for much of the population. Within this area of understanding statistical figures further elucidate areas of differentiation between the two generations. In terms of male education for Baby Boomers, it’s indicated that 25% have some college and 13% have four years of college or mo re. This is compared to males in the Millennial Generation wherein 34% have some college and 15% have four years of college or more. In these regards, the figures for individuals completing college are highly similar. This is not true for females where the disparity between the generations is marked, with 20% of Millennials completing four years of college or more as compared to 11% of Baby Boomers. These changing educational opportunities are also indicative of the shifting of gender roles among the two age groups. While Baby Boomers matriculated in an era where the male was still seen as the primary bread winner, the Millennial Generation increasingly saw the increase of women’s responsibility in the workplace. Another prominent area of consideration is the relative level of diversity between the Baby Boomer Generation and the Millennial Generation. One of the main considerations occurs in the reduction of the majority ethnicity between the two generations. In these regards , the Baby Boomer generation is noted to constitute 77% white, 9% Hispanic, and 12% black. This is compared to the Millennial Generation which demonstrates a demographic make-up of 61% white, 19% Hispanic, and 13% black. The main distinction between the two is clearly the strong rise in Hispanic populations between the generations. While this is indicative of shifts within these generations, it is also highly indicative of general shifts in the overriding population, both demographically and socio-culturally. While educational opportunities and diversity levels are statistically correlated they are also indicative of a number shifting attitudes and perspectives between the generations. Within this context of understanding, a number of qualitative understandings have been articulated. Starbucker presents the Baby Boomer contrast to Don Tapscott’s seminal text on the Millennial Generation Growing Up Digital. Among the comparative elements Starbucker considers contrasting attitu des on the nature of freedom, with both generations valuing it, but the Millennial Generation achieving heightened levels with increased access to digital technology, such as cell-phones and portable Internet access. Another prominent differentiation between the two generations is the outlook on the advance of technology. While the Baby Boomer generation experienced great technological leaps in terms of medical care, the television, and advancing car efficiency, the Millennial Generation has come to be almost identified with the shifting nature of technological progress. Another prominent area of consideration is the shifting attitudes towards the political spectrum. From a broad and qualitative under

Investigating Rates of Reactions Essay Example for Free

Investigating Rates of Reactions Essay Investigate which factors out of temperature, surface area and concentration speed up the reaction between magnesium and hydrochloric acid the most. Chemical reaction: Mg (s)+ 2HCI (aq)== MgCI2 (aq)+H2 (g) Prediction: I think the most effective factor to speed up the rate of reaction will be temperature, I say this because when the molecules are at a higher temperature they will have greater kinetics energy and move more rapidly, so they will collide more frequently and most importantly with greater energy. Then surface area will be second greatest effect, increasing the surface area of the solid increases the number of collisions between solid and particles in solutions. If we take into consideration a cube with each side 1cm long it has a total surface area of 6cm2, halve each of the cubes so that there are eight cubes each with 0. 5cm long sides and the total surface area has doubled to 12cm, now halve the size of these smaller cubes. Surface area of 1 cube, sides 1cm= 6 sides x (1cm x1cm) = 6cm2 Surface area of 8 cubes sides 0. 5cm= 8 sides x 6 sides x (0. 5 x 0. 5)=12cm2 Surface area of 64 cubes, sides 0. 25cm= 64 cubes x 6 sides x (0. 25 x 0. 25)= 24cm2 Having the average size of the particles in a given quantity of solid, doubles the surface area. So making a solid reactant in a lump form into powder considerably increases the surface area. Concentration will be the third greatest factor, which will speed up the rate of reaction. Any increase in concentration should also increase the rate of reaction; if there are more molecules present there will be more collisions. Increasing the number of collisions does not always increase the rate of reaction. What matters is the numbers of effective, effective collisions have to involve the relevant molecules, in the correct orientation, with energy at the least equal to the activation level. Equipment   Conical flask   Hydrochloric acid of 4 different molars (0. 1, 0. 5, 1, 2) Stop clock Basin of water   Bung with the tube   Magnesium   Measuring tube   Top pan balance Plan: Concentration Four different concentrations will be used. (0. 1, 0. 5, 1, 2) firstly I will use the 0.1 molar of hydrochloric, 6cm of magnesium in conjunction with the 15 ml of hydrochloric acid. When the bung is put into the conical flask the amount of gas given off can be read. I will leave the magnesium and the acid for 1 minute and I will check how much gas is given off every 10 seconds and I will record it. This will be done for all the other ranges of concentrations. Temperature I will be using 4 different temperatures (fridge 12oC, room 24oC, 50oC, 60oC). The high temperature acids will be placed in a water of their designated temperature. The other acids will be placed in their obvious places. The acid will be put in the conical flask with 6 cm of magnesium then the gas given off will be read and recorded as done previously for the concentration. Surface Area For surface I will be using 5 different lengths of magnesium ribbon, (6, 5, 2, 1, 0. 5cm) I will also be using 0. 06g of magnesium powder. Each measurement of magnesium will be used in conjunction with 15ml of hydrochloric acid. When both elements are put into the conical flask the gas given off will be read and record in the same fashion as the other tests. For each test I will do it twice to make sure my results are realiable. Fair test To ensure that I carry out a fair test I will make sure I will use the same amount of magnesium apart from when I am testing that particular variable. Also I will also use the same amount of hydrochloric acid, also I will use the same concentration apart from when Im testing that variable. I will also time each test for the same amount of time. Safety   Safety goggles worn at all times.   Precautions taken when dealing with acids.   Follow all the rules of the lab so that I can work efficiently alongside others when they are doing their experiments. Results  Concentration 2nd set of results Temperature  Fridge 4 Conclusion From doing this investigation I have successfully achieved my aim, my aim was to investigate the factors, which affect the rate of reaction. My prediction was also correct. For concentration the gas given off for o. 1 molar of hydrochloric acid was much less that what was given off for 2 molar. When powder was used for surface area ample amounts of gas was given off where as when 6cm was used not much was given off. When the acid was at a higher temperature more gas was given off, this hypothesis wasnt backed up with the results from the first test, which is why it was good that I repeated all the tests. Evaluation On a whole I thought I worked quite well, but the investigation could have been conducted in a better fashion. The particular method we used to collect the gas wasnt that effective. If a gas syringe in conjunction with a clamp stand was used our results would have been much better. I think doing the investigation twice was a good decision because doing this made it manifest that the first set of results werent as reliable, this is because when the first set of results were compared to the 2nd set of results they were quite different especially room temperature and 50oC. In the experiment the amount of gas given off for those specific temperatures were lower than the second experiment. Scientific knowledge proves that when the temperature is raised the rate of reaction will be faster. Also another thing I could of done was to do all experiments in the method we did to collect gas and also kept everything the same but the variable to change could have been the method in which we collect the gas. By doing this I could of seen which method to collect the gas would have been most effective. Show preview only The above preview is unformatted text This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Patterns of Behaviour section.

The Social Contract Theory Philosophy Essay

The Social Contract Theory Philosophy Essay The term social contract describes a broad class of philosophical theories whose subject is the implied agreements by which people form nations and maintain a social order. In laymens terms, this means that the people give up some of their rights to a government in order to receive protection and social order. Social contract theory provides the rationale behind the historically important notion that legitimate state authority must be derived from the consent of the governed. The starting point for most of these theories is a heuristic examination of the human condition absent any social order, termed the state of nature or natural state. In this state of being, an individuals action is bound only by his or her conscience. From this common starting point, the various features of social contract theory attempt to explain, in different ways, why it is in an individuals rational self-interest to voluntarily give up the freedom of action one has under the natural state (their so called n atural rights) in order to obtain the benefits provided by the formation of social structures. Common to all of these theories is the notion of a sovereign will, which all members of a society are bound by the social contract to respect. The various types of social contract theory that have developed are largely differentiated by their definition of the sovereign will, be it a King (monarchy), a Council (oligarchy) or The Majority (republic or democracy). Under a theory first articulated by Plato, members within a society implicitly agree to the terms of the social contract by their choice to stay within the society and receive protection. Thus implicit in most forms of social contract is that freedom of movement is a fundamental or natural right which society may not legitimately require an individual to surrender to the sovereign will. The social contract theory has some basic features where it says- firstly. State is an artificial institution signifying that it is a means to an end, secondly, it is created by human beings with the help of a contract, thirdly, the contract must be based on the consent of one and all, and lastly that prior to formation of state me lived in a hypothetical situation known as state of nature. Thomas Hobbes (1651), John Locke (1689), and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1762) are the most famous philosophers of the social contract theory, which formed the theoretical groundwork of democracy. Although the theory of natural rights influenced the development of classical liberalism, its emphasis on individualism and its rejection of the necessity to subordinate individual liberty to the sovereign will stands in opposition to the general tenets of social contract theory. According to Hobbes theory, without society, we would live in a state of nature (a hypothetical situation since it cannot be supported by historical data), where we each have unlimited natural freedoms. The downside of this general autonomy is that it includes the right to all things and thus the freedom to harm all who threaten ones own self-preservation; there are no positive rights, only laws of nature and an endless war of all against all. In other words, anyone in the state of nature can do anything he likes; but this also means that anyone can do anything he likes to anyone else. The state of nature according to Hobbes is presocial and pre political in nature and there is no scope for development to take place. To avoid this, we jointly agree to a social contract by which we each gain civil rights in return for subjecting ourselves to civil law or to political authority. In Hobbes formulation, the sovereign power is not a party of the contract but instead the sovereign is its c reation, and so is not bound by it. The command of the sovereign is law and the contract is irrevocable. Alternatively, some have argued that we gain civil rights in return for accepting the obligation to respect and defend the rights of others, giving up some freedoms to do so; this alternative formulation of the duty arising from the social contract is often identified with militia, or defense activity. State of nature is a term in political philosophy used in the social contract theories to describe the hypothetical condition of humanity before the states foundation and its monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force. In a broader sense, a state of nature is the condition before the rule of positive law and order comes into being. In some versions of social contract theory, there are no rights in the state of nature, only freedoms, and it is the contract that creates rights and obligations. In other versions the opposite occurs: the contract imposes restrictions upon individuals that curtail their natural rights. Hobbess philosophy English philosopher Thomas Hobbes in his famous work Leviathan first posited the concept of a state of nature in the 17th century. Hobbes described the concept in the Latin phrase bellum omnium contra omnes, meaning the war of all against all. In this state, any person has a natural right to do anything to preserve his or her own liberty or safety. Hobbes believed that human beings in a state of nature would behave with cruelty towards one another. Yet Hobbes argued that people had every right to defend themselves by whatever means necessary in the absence of order. He believed that such a condition would lead to a war of every man against every man and make life solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short. He believed that in the international arena, states behave as individuals do in a state of nature. Rousseaus theory Hobbess view was challenged in the 18th century by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who claimed that Hobbes was taking socialized persons and simply imagining them living outside of the society in which they were raised. He affirmed instead that people were born pure and good; men knew neither vice nor virtue since they had almost no dealings with each other. Their bad habits were the products of civilization specifically social hierarchies, property, and markets Natural rights are those universal rights that are seen as inherent in the nature of people and not contingent on human actions or beliefs. One theory of natural rights was developed from the theory of natural law during the Enlightenment in opposition to the divine right of kings, and provided a moral justification for liberalism. The concept of natural rights can be contrasted with the concept of legal rights: A natural right is one that is claimed to exist even when the government or society as a whole does not enforce it, whereas a legal right is a right specifically created by the government or society, for the benefit of its citizens. Thomas Hobbes was an English philosopher who influenced nearly all-western political philosophy. He is best known for his contribution to the social contract theory of origin of state. Hobbes was greatly influenced in his ideas by the English civil war that broke out in 1642. This led Hobbes to produce a book to set forth his theory of civil government in relation to the political crisis resulting from the war. It was based on an unpublished treatise of 1640. The State, it now seemed to Hobbes, might be regarded as a great artificial man or monster, composed of men, with a life that might be traced from its generation under pressure of human needs to its dissolution through civil strife proceeding from human passions. The work was closed with a general Review and Conclusion; in direct response to the war, which raised the question of the subjects right to change allegiance when a former sovereigns power to protect was irrecoverably gone. In addition, he criticized religious doctrines on rationalistic grounds in the Commonwealth. Hobbess Leviathan had immediate effects because of its secular nature and he had to appeal to the revolutionary English government for protection, which explains his fondness for monarchy and gratitude for royal patronage. Leviathan was written during the English Civil War; much of the book is occupied with demonstrating the necessity of a strong central authority to avoid the evil of discord and civil war. Any abuses of power by this authority are to be accepted as the price of peace. In particular, the doctrine of separation of powers is rejected: the sovereign must control civil, military, judicial, and ecclesiastical powers. Hobbes explicitly states that the sovereign has authority to assert power over matters of faith and doctrine, and that if he does not do so, he invites discord. Jean-Jacques Rousseau was a Genevan philosopher whose political ideas influenced the French Revolution, the development of socialist theory, and the growth of nationalism. Rousseau had lived a poor life full of hardship and travelled all over observing the inequalities among the rich and poor and the different lifestyles. This led him to write a famous book of his known as Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality among Men. Rousseau saw a fundamental divide between society and human nature. He contended that man was neither inherently good nor bad when in the state of nature (the state of all other animals, and the condition humankind was in before the creation of civilization and society), but is corrupted by society. This idea has often led to the attribution to Rousseau the idea of the noble savage. He held that humans are good because they are self-sufficient and thus not subject to the vices of political society. He viewed society as artificial and held that the development of society, especially the growth of social interdependence, has been inimical to the well-being of human beings. He claims that as humans were forced to associate together more closely by the pressure of population growth, they underwent a psychological transformation and came to value the good opinion of others as an essential component of their own well-being. Rousseau associated this new self-awareness with a golden age of human flourishing. However, the development of agriculture, metallurgy, private property, and the division of labor led to humans becoming increasingly dependent on one another, and led to inequality. The resulting state of conflict led Rousseau to suggest that the first state was invented as a kind of social contract made at the suggestion of the rich and powerful. This original contract was deeply flawed as the wealthiest and most powerful members of society tricked the general population, and thus instituted inequality as a fundamental feature of human society. Rousseaus own conception of the social contract can be understood as an alternative to this form of associatio n. In his famous work The Social Contract, he begins by saying, Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains. One man thinks himself the master of others, but remains more of a slave than they are. Rousseau claimed that the state of nature was a primitive condition without law or morality, which human beings left for the benefits and necessity of cooperation. As society developed, division of labor and private property required the human race to adopt institutions of law. In the degenerate phase of society, man is prone to be in frequent competition with his fellow men while at the same time becoming increasingly dependent on them. This double pressure threatens both his survival and his freedom. According to Rousseau, by joining through the social contract and abandoning their claims of natural right, individuals can both preserve themselves and remain free. This is because submission to the authority of the general will of the people as a whole guarantees individuals against being subordinated to the wills of others and ensures that they obey themselves because they are, collectively, the authors of the law. While Rousseau argues that sovereignty should be in the hands of the people, he also makes a sharp distinction between sovereign and government. The government is charged with implementing and enforcing the general will and is composed of a smaller group of citizens, known as magistrates. Rousseaus ideas were influential at the time of the French Revolution although, since popular sovereignty was exercised through representatives rather than directly, it cannot be said that the Revolution was in any sense an implementation of Rousseaus ideas. In Thomas Hobbes book Leviathan- Parts One and Two, he presents a commonwealth ruled by a sovereign leader that is based on the laws of nature and the kingdom of God. At the root of the commonwealth is a social contract, which is a covenant binding the individuals of the society to wills and judgments of the sovereign leader. The contract explores the asociality of the human species and self- preservation, which is fundamental to the human drive. Influenced by Hobbes social contract, Jean Jacques Rousseau published On the Social Contract presenting his theory of the social contract that both expanded and differed from Hobbes principles. Rousseaus social contract presented the governing factor to be the general will. Although Hobbes and Rousseau have differing Social Contracts they each are represented by the phrase, A kingdom divided cannot stand; for, the former is a reference to a monarchy and the latter is a reference to the general will. In Hobbes Leviathan, he presents the asociality of human nature. Because, he notes, human kind is equal in both the body and the mind, men are in a constant state of war with one another. For, from equality arises the desire to attain our goals, which leads to competition between men who are seeking the same end. Thus, out of equality develops diffidence and war. In this state of war men, live without any common power and thus, every man is enemy to every man. Their only security is their strength compounded with the strength of their associates. Because man has no common strength or power, there are no governing laws; hence, there are no injustices. Accordingly, there is no place in the state of war for rights and wrongs. Hobbes notes, Force and fraud are in war the two cardinal virtues, both of these virtues are unjust. He concludes that the only motivation man has to seek peace is the fear of the consequences of war. The motivation of fear does not connote social tendencies of the human specie to aid one another; instead, it clearly notes humankinds selfish disregard of each other. In addition to humankinds tendency towards asociality, Hobbes presents people as being inclined towards self-preservation above all other concerns. The theme of self-preservation is presented in what Hobbes calls the right of nature. He explains this fundamental concept to be, the liberty each man has to use his own power, as he will himself, for the preservation of his own nature- that is to say, of his own life, meaning that any man can go to whatever lengths necessary in order to preserve his own life. Furthermore, an additional law of nature notes that, as a rule, a man is prohibited from behaving in a manner that is destructive to his life. Hobbes also supports what the Christian bible has entitled the golden rule, or the declaration that one should behave, as he or she would wish to be treated. This is a law of self-preservation, which, if ardently followed, would greatly increase peace. Yet, the golden rule is not often followed in the state of war; for, one is disinterested i n any other mans desires besides his own. Thus according to Hobbes, in a state of war man is allowed to behave in any manner he wishes; however, his primary interest and natural guide are the rules of self-preservation. Both humankinds nature of asociality and tendency towards self-preservation are incorporated into Thomas Hobbes social contract. His social contract presents a commonwealth in which there is one sovereign leader, to which all of his subjects have pledged a covenant to surrender their judgments to those wills and judgments of the sovereign. The covenant between the subjects and the sovereign entails very specific rules of conduct. First, the subjects are bound to maintain the same form of the government. They cannot lawfully make a new covenant among themselves; nor, can they break their covenant to the sovereign in any form. For, if one man dissents all of the other subjects should leave the commonwealth and return to a state of war, but this is a great injustice. In addition, they cannot try to replace their covenant to the sovereign with a covenant to God, for a covenant with God must be a lie, unless God, himself, contacted a subject, which, one must admit, is highly unlikely. Sec ond, a sovereign cannot break the covenant with his subjects. Thus, none of his subjects can be freed from his discretion and will. Third, the subject is never endowed with the power to punish the sovereign. Fourth, the roll of the sovereign is to perform whatever is necessary in order to maintain a state of peace and to defend for all of his subjects. In addition, the sovereign determines what doctrines are appropriate to teach his subjects. Fifth, the sovereign is endowed with the right to create governing rules. According to such rules, subjects must lead his life. Furthermore, he has the right to declare peace or war. Lastly, he develops a hierarchy within the subjects, pending on their level of honor. Thus, the sovereign has ultimate control. Hobbes believed that the sovereign ruler must be endowed with utter control; for he believed, a kingdom divided in itself cannot stand. He recognized that often the dissolution of a commonwealth occurs due to the division of the sovereign power. For instance, if two states join, yet each maintains their previous rulers, the subjects will never have a definitive ruler or social code. Dissolution of the commonwealth is also spurred by abuse of power, monopolies, conquering of a state during wartime, and private judgments of good and evil. Although it is always an injustice if a subject questions the rulings of the sovereign, Hobbes occasionally acknowledges that it is necessary. Thus, the premise of Hobbes social contract lies in a single leader with entirely obedient subjects. It is clear that Hobbes Leviathan influenced the social contract put forth by Jean-Jacques Rousseau entitled On the Social Contract. At the onset of his book, Rousseau presents the fundamental problem for which he has developed his social contract: Find a form of association which defends and protects with all common forces the person and goods of each associate, and by means of which each one, while uniting with all, nevertheless obeys only himself and remains as free as before. Rousseau presents the predicament of an association, which protects each associate, while heeding the common good, yet still obeys each associates judgment and will. To this, he proposes a social contract, which is composed of clauses defined by the nature of the act. These clauses are generally accepted and thus sprout from ones reasoning. A violation of this social contract leads to each person regaining their liberty established prior to that association, but losing the liberty the association provided. Rousseau further simplifies his social contract by explaining that these clauses are reducible to one clause. This simplified clause states that the man who breeches the contract from each associate in the community, shall incur alienation from all associates. Rousseau finally condenses his social contract into one statement: Each of us places his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will; and as one we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole. Rousseau is concluding that each man places his power under the control of the general will or the balance of the sum of private wills with the sum of general interests. The largest difference between Rousseaus social contract and Hobbes is the state of nature. For, as previously stated, Hobbes state of nature between men was that of war and diffidence. Additionally, Hobbes believes that social order is a state of nature. Yet, Rousseau diverts from Hobbes on this matter. At the onset of his book, Rousseau notes that although the social order is sacred it is not a natural order. In addition, Rousseau explains that the state of war cannot exist solely between individuals, but a private war is one between two states. In such a case, individuals are enemies only due to the nature of war, not due to the nature of mankind. This gap is the primary reason that Rousseau and Hobbes social contracts differ. For, Hobbes social contract is pendent on the natural, perpetual state of war between men. Because of such a state, Hobbes feels that it is necessary to implement the strongest form of government, Monarchy. Accordingly, because Rousseau does not believe in t his natural state of war, he finds the people more capable of reasoning the publics best interest. Thus, he relies on the general will of all to determine the actions of the governing body. Despite this difference, Rousseaus social contract is very similar to that of Hobbes. They each are rooted in the principle of a divided kingdom cannot stand. It is clear that Hobbes social contract upholds said principle for it is based on the premise of the one sovereign leader. Additionally, Rousseaus social contract unifies the kingdom differently. For, according to Rousseau, the unity of the citizens lies in their general will. Thus, the government will act in a manner favorable to the general will and accordingly, the public is united. Hobbes Leviathan: Parts 1 and 2, presents a moral code of conduct established through prudence and science. His proposed commonwealth attempts to protect men from one another by unifying a group of subjects under one sovereign leader. His theory, however, does not account for potential lunatic dictators who incur mass genocide on their people or develop a state of divided classes, with an extremely impoverished lower class and an unnecessarily wealthy upper class, or overall misuse of their ultimate control. Yet, Rousseaus social contract has its negative points too. As Rousseau admits, the public does not have the intellectual capability to rationalize the general good. Individuals may maintain the best intentions of determining the general will, yet each response will be skewed. Thus one needs to take into account only their intentions; yet, it is impossible to accordingly determine the general will. Hence, neither Hobbes nor Rousseaus social contract is perfect.

Women As Victims Feminist Theories Sociology Essay

Women As Victims Feminist Theories Sociology Essay The feminist theory is based on the woman description, their human experience, and the crisis they face in the patriarchal society. It seeks social change in stopping the neglect and women subordination. In this regard, the experiences of women in the society are at the center of feminist theory. Most feminist theory believe that gender is a central component of life, and effects women in different ways and it should be well addressed in the various aspects of life. Patriarchy is an ideology that the society is under the rule and domination of the males ideas. In that view, society has laid structure and values that subordinate the women. The concept of patriarchy first is based on the value of male status achievement. It argues that males hold the high status roles. In this regard, women are in a lower positions either in responsibility or production , and they appear inferior to men. This form of patriarchy leads women powerless in determining the course of their lives. It leaves a considerable number of women vulnerable to domestic violence. The status inferred to them subjects them to suffering. In the book, Saving Bernice: Battered Women, Welfare, and Poverty, Bernice, an actual client of Jody Rapheal, suffers under the welfare institution, which abuses her. She is victimized in an attempt to liberate herself and children from the experience of battering. She faces numerous problems in an attempt to free herself from the batterer. Feminists hold that the patriarchal values, which have taken roots in the society, are responsible for the victimization of women. They hold that these values and cultural practices have subjected many women to suffering and victimization through domestic violence. The value of male dominance in patriarchy is also argued to play a significant role in the suffering of women. Feminists believe, dominance resides in males, and women have faced it in order to get their way. In lewd of this everything is male thought based which gives men power because women circumstances are not a consideration in some aspects of life which makes it hard for females. This has given men the way to be heavily involved in domestic violence and continue it. The sufferings of Bernice, an actual client of Jody Rapheal, in the book, Saving Bernice: Battered Women, Welfare, and Poverty, can be viewed as a product of patrichary , which subjects her to suffering as she seeks to free herself from domestic violence. The author notes that, domestic violence causes the victim to be vulnerable to the welfare bureaucracy. The author also talks about hurdles her client Bernice had to face to escape the abuse she faced. The text brings out clearly the many hurdles that women of the day face to escape, and be self-sufficient. As discussed in the slides, under feminist analysis, the society has reinforced patriarchy. This has led to women being denied the power of decision-making. This may be the reason responsible for the sufferings of women in society The slides also present the feminist view that many societies have had problems in defining woman battering as a crime problem. This form of context paves a way for the male dominant gender to have more power, and liberty to engage in this criminal behavior. The feminists theories view social institutions, such as family, job, churches, and other to be responsible for maintaining violence. As discussed in slides, the liberal feminists advocate for women to engage in the labor market as opposed to taking dominance in traditional roles of childcare. Notably, they feel that the traditional family as a social unit has subjected many women to suffering through women dominance in childcare, and the violence that takes place in the family. The slide on Marxist feminist argues that womens labor is reproductive and not productive; therefore, not creating surplus value because of their reproduction ability. According to Marist feminist capitalism is the evil. In capitalist nations, women are abused whenever they are deemed as reproduction tools to produce the labor for the next generation. The slide on radical feminism equally portrays a number of practices, which are practiced in the social institutions, such as, family, relationship and child rearing. Radical feminists argue that male power has been reinforced through numerous practices maintained by these institutions. The slide also mentions the practices of housework, marriage, child rearing involving women. As a result of this women end up abused by these institutions, by being allowed and sometimes must to take on some of the practices in certain ways, which subordinates them to their male counterparts. Feminists believe, the social patterns and institutions in the society play a critical role in affecting the efforts of women to seek to free themselves and their children from social and physical oppression. Social institutions such as the family and home matters maintained within the structures of patriarchy are said to affect the lives of women. This is because men establish the norms and values and beliefs in these social institutions. In addition, laws are as well established by men, which makes it harder for women to leave their violent partners legally. For example, in class we discussed when women attack their violent partner in seemingly harsh ways when the abuse wasnt currently and physically happening to the male made legal system this would be murder and not a act of self defense and survival. (Tandon 2008 p.123). In conclusion, the role of patriarchy in controlling women in society, and its influence on the domestic violence is very complex. social institutions encourage as well as sustain violence against women. Whether it be because of gender inequality, a view of liberal feminist. Economic class and their role in production and reproduction, which is a Marist view or lastly which in my opinion it is the most accurate and should not be view as radical because the word radical is viewed unconsciously negatively most of the time that male power is exercised through social intuitions, and jobs women general have in a family setting. However I dont not think all men are responsible of this but rather the system that was made by men by not meant to be it primary job condones difference between male and female ideas which eradiate hurdles that female have to make all of which is just an indirect outcome that was not foreseen.

Marketing Strategy Implementation in Higher Education Essay -- higher e

The scholarly article which I selected to review addressed the strategic implementation of marketing initiatives within international higher education entities (Naidoo & Woo, 2011). This article was of particular interest to me due to its specific focus on marketing within higher education entities (HEI’s). The authors focused their research on 10 universities which recruit international students; specifically, on 570 questionnaires from mid-level marketing managers responsible for strategic implementation of marketing initiatives. (Naidoo & Woo, 2011, p. 1117) The authors note the disparity in success between HEI’s in addressing the international student market, and raise the implied question of whether differences in successful strategic implementation could be contributory. This study focuses on strategic implementation, as contrasted with strategic formulation, as a driver for marketing success. The premise of the authors is that by focusing on the factors whic h influence successful strategic implementation, HEI’s can enhance marketing program success. In addition to highlighting strategic implementation as a marketing success factor, they emphasize the value of a higher education focus in their research. Although this business category has achieved prolific growth in recent years, most marketing research has been focused on a general business environment. The research found that strategic implementation is viewed by marketing management as operations-driven in nature. The authors uncovered 4 primary constructs from their data: implementation related outcome variables, dimensions of commitment, strategy factors and role factors. (Naidoo & Woo, 2011, p. 1122) Put in simpler terms, the authors identified strategy commi... ...ting program success. They have demonstrated that mid-level marketing managers within Higher Education view individual commitment to the selected strategy, as well as the perceived significance of their role in implementation, as critical factors to role performance, and ultimately program success. Suggestions for follow up may include a closer analysis of successful and less successful HEI’s, to further understand how these factors influence the success or failure of these organizations’ marketing programs. Works Cited Kotler, P., & Keller, K. (2012). A framework for marketing management. (5 ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ : Pearson Hall. Naidoo, V., & Wu, T. (2011). Marketing strategy implementation in higher education: A mixed approach for model development and testing. Journal Of Marketing Management, 27(11/12), 1117-1141. doi:10.1080/0267257X.2011.609132

RIP American Motors: 1954-87 :: Free Essays Online

RIP American Motors: 1954-87 In the early 1900's, automobile manufacturing was a growing business. Independent automakers such as Auburn, Hudson, Nash, and Studebaker served a focused market, catering to small car drivers, not covered by the "Big Three" makers: Ford, General Motors, and Chrysler. Many of these independent automakers saw their last days during the Great Depression. After World War II, there was just a handful left. American Motors was formed by the merger of two of these independents: Nash and Hudson. Nash President George Mason and Vice President George Romney saw the inevitable, to survive, the independents had to merge. Mason first talked to Packard who could not agree to a merger. After Mason tired of Packard's reluctance to join, he approached his second choice, Hudson. Hudson President, A.E. Barrit saw that Hudson was quickly losing money and decided that a merger would be the best course of action. On May 1, 1954, Nash and Hudson joined, forming American Motors. (Foster 11) Mason was named chairman of the board, president, chief executive officer, and general manager. His assistant George Romney was named vice president, and Barrit became a director of the company. For the first year of production, all of the old Hudsons were dropped, either for being dated or just not doing well in the market. The all-new Hudsons were based on existing Nash bodies with design features to keep them different. All Hudson production was also moved out of Detroit into Nash's main plant at Kenosha, Wisconsin. In October, six months after the merger, Mason fell ill and unexpectedly died. The next day, Romney assumed all of his titles and responsibilities. At the end of 1955, American Motors closed its West Coast plant at El Segundo, California, and moved all production to Kenosha. This move increased production, but still ended the year with a loss of $6.9 million. (Foster 18) The 1956 model year brought out a new car, The Rambler. This was not a new name, but the car came out with no mention of Nash or Hudson. The press raved the new Rambler with its improved power, larger interior, and smoother steering. The rest of the American Motors line however, still carried the dated styles of 1952.