Human Rights Essay Example for Free

Human Rights Essay The Internet appears to be the ideal technology for democracy. When the Internet began, people thought they could communicate and even engage in commerce without the need for a big police force. As people from different cultures begin connecting to the Internet, it appears that the Internet is only as democratic as people make it. Government’s next move online has been significantly less comfortable. China has recently forced Google to rewrite their search software so that it supports the values of state security over individual freedom by blocking certain sites. In order to continue doing business in China, the Chinese government forced Google to disable certain functionalities of their products so that Chinese citizens cannot connect to Web pages on topics such as human rights and democracy. The Chinese government and Google derived the so-called Great Firewall of China in order to conceal from the public the potential contents that may pose threat to Chinese ideologies and politics. References Baase, S. (2007).Gift of Fire: Social, Legal, and Ethical Issues for Computing and the Internet. Pearson Prentice Hall. Garland, E. (2007). Future, Inc. : How Businesses Can Anticipate and Profit from Whats Next. AMACOM Div American Management. Giddens, A. (2006). Sociology. Polity. Hassan, R. (2004). Media, Politics and the Network Society. McGraw-Hill International. Human Rights Watch, . (2007). Human Rights Watch World Report 2007. Seven Stories Press. Landow, G. P. (2006). Hypertext 3. 0: Critical Theory and New Media in an Era of Globalization. JHU Press. Marling, W. H. (2006). How American Is Globalization?. JHU Press. Meza, E. P. (2007). Coming Attractions? : Hollywood, High Tech, and the Future of Entertainment. Stanford University Press. Reuvid, J. , Li, Y. (2005). Doing Business With China. GMB Publishing Ltd. Wood, A. F. , Smith, M. J. (2005). Online Communication: Linking Technology, Identity, and Culture. Routledge.

Character Profile of Friar Lawrence :: English Literature Essays

Character Profile of Friar Lawrence Most movies portray friars as wise mentors, or strict religion-followers, that lead lawful, moral, and virtuous lives. But this tragic play of Romeo and Juliet begs to differ, as the friar does nothing but help achieve the forbidden plans of two star-crossed lovers. As Friar Lawrence gets involved more deeply into the schemes of Romeo and Juliet, he too begins to warp sly plans out of his head, such as the potion plan. Despite his conscience, Friar Lawrence reveals a potion that will put Juliet to a false death, in the â€Å"Potion Plan† scene. His motivation was caused by the weeping and tears of Juliet who was in the hands of a twisted marriage against her will. She had already been married to her love, but now that promise was in danger of being broken. From the few lines that the friar speaks, the audience realizes that this friar is certainly not the stereotype friar that goes around trying to live an impossible life of perfection. Though it may have been wrong to help children marry against their parents’ permission, and let them fake a death to run away together, Friar Lawrence did the exact thing. Friar Lawrence didn’t think of what was lawfully right, but of the destiny of two people, that were very important to him. He cared for them, and wished Romeo and Juliet well. He valued them as his own children. It goes to show that Friar Lawrence was human, also, and not perfect, since no one can be perfect. Friar Lawrence felt an internal conflict within him – the conflict of self against self. He knew in his mind that it was wrong to help a teen run away with her lover, who happened to be a murderer. But he also felt himself reach out to them, as he had known them as his own children for a very long time. He knew what a desperate situation Juliet and Romeo were in, and knew that he could prevent their lives from being ruined. But the problem was that the only way to solve everything, was to take a ‘wrong path’, that everyone opposed. In the end, he ends up helping his fellow children. But by this decision, he affected the whole plot of the play, and caused it to turn greatly. This plan would have turned out marvelously, but he made a few mistakes. Character Profile of Friar Lawrence :: English Literature Essays Character Profile of Friar Lawrence Most movies portray friars as wise mentors, or strict religion-followers, that lead lawful, moral, and virtuous lives. But this tragic play of Romeo and Juliet begs to differ, as the friar does nothing but help achieve the forbidden plans of two star-crossed lovers. As Friar Lawrence gets involved more deeply into the schemes of Romeo and Juliet, he too begins to warp sly plans out of his head, such as the potion plan. Despite his conscience, Friar Lawrence reveals a potion that will put Juliet to a false death, in the â€Å"Potion Plan† scene. His motivation was caused by the weeping and tears of Juliet who was in the hands of a twisted marriage against her will. She had already been married to her love, but now that promise was in danger of being broken. From the few lines that the friar speaks, the audience realizes that this friar is certainly not the stereotype friar that goes around trying to live an impossible life of perfection. Though it may have been wrong to help children marry against their parents’ permission, and let them fake a death to run away together, Friar Lawrence did the exact thing. Friar Lawrence didn’t think of what was lawfully right, but of the destiny of two people, that were very important to him. He cared for them, and wished Romeo and Juliet well. He valued them as his own children. It goes to show that Friar Lawrence was human, also, and not perfect, since no one can be perfect. Friar Lawrence felt an internal conflict within him – the conflict of self against self. He knew in his mind that it was wrong to help a teen run away with her lover, who happened to be a murderer. But he also felt himself reach out to them, as he had known them as his own children for a very long time. He knew what a desperate situation Juliet and Romeo were in, and knew that he could prevent their lives from being ruined. But the problem was that the only way to solve everything, was to take a ‘wrong path’, that everyone opposed. In the end, he ends up helping his fellow children. But by this decision, he affected the whole plot of the play, and caused it to turn greatly. This plan would have turned out marvelously, but he made a few mistakes.

Is There a Valid Test of Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory? Essay

Department of Behaviour in Organisations, University of Lancaster; on study ieavefrom the Department of Psychology, University of Melbourne There are several ways of stating Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation and each version can be tested in various ways. Those who defend the theory argue that researchers who fail to find support for the theory have usually departed from the procedures used by Herzberg. There have been variations in methods of gathering data, categorizing the responses, and analysing the results. These variations may be justified on the grounds that the strength of any theory lies in its logic and in its ability to withstand deviations from a set method. Some tests of Herzberg’s theory are more likely to produce support than others. This was confirmed in a study of London bus crews. However it can be argued that there is more than one valid test of Herzberg’s two-factor theory, though some of these are likely to produce contradictory res ults. The Herzberg theory, or two-factor theory of motivation or Motivator-Hygiene (M-H) theory, has given rise to a mass of investigations and experiments in industry and in many different types of organizations. Results do not always support Herzberg; in fact, only about one in three do so. Donald Hebb once said that when it is a question of survival, theories are like women—fecundity is more important than purity. M-H theory has certainly been very fertile—more so perhaps than any other theory in applied social psychology. Many industrial psychologists have not only survived but indeed thrived on the theory. The fecundity of the theory is not in doubt but its purity certainly is highly suspect. WHAT IS THE THEORY? The theory is in two parts, each of which can be stated in several ways. Part 1 says that job factors can be separated into two quite distinct sets: the first set consists of factors which contribute to job satisfaction and rarely if at all to job dissatisfaction; these factors are called ‘Motivators’. The second set consists of job factors which contribute to job  dissatisfaction and rarely if at all to job satisfaction; these are the ‘Hygienes’. Consequently job satisfaction and dissatisfaction are separate dimensions and not the two ends of a single dimension. This is a flat contradiction of the traditional view in psychology that satisfaction and dissatisfaction constitute a single dimension. The first difficulty with the theory in practice is that the data usually include a proportion of responses which do not fit this pattern. Some Motivators contribute to dissatisfaction while some Hygienes contribute to satisfaction. Within-factors reversals are far from rare and sometimes outnumber responses in the expected direction. These incongruent responses are attributed to sampling error, which of course is begging the question—rejecting inconvenient data in order to save the theory. The analysis then takes the form of a relative comparison—for Motivators we   predict more satisfaction than dissatisfaction, and for Hygienes we predict more dissatisfaction than satisfaction and test for significance accordingly. What investigators fail to point out is that in doing this they are really reformulating the theory to fit their facts. The revised theory now says, in effect, that Motivators contribute more to satisfaction than to dissatisfaction while Hygienes contribute more to dissatisfaction than satisfaction. This is reasonable but it makes nonsense of the claim that satisfaction and dissatisfaction are separate dimensions. In fact it supports the traditional view of the single continuum; different job factors produce ranges of satisfaction-dissatisfaction which are to be found at different positions on the same continuum. Part 2 of the theory is also in two parts. First: paying more attention to Motivators (intrinsic job satisfaction or higher order needs) will increase satisfaction but will not affect any dissatisfaction with the job; or, alternatively, improving Motivators will improve organizational efficiency as shown by higher productivity, better quality, better attendance and punctuality, lower labour turnover†¦ in short, by improved performance. Second: paying more  attention to Hygiene factors (extrinsic job satisfaction or lower order needs) will decrease dissatisfaction but will not increase overall satisfaction; or alternatively, there will be no improvement in performance—on the contrary, taking costs into account there will be a lowered organizational efficiency because improving Hygienes will cost the organization more money. Notice that for each part of Part 2, i.e. as regards both Motivators and Hygienes, there are alternative predictions. Increase of satisfaction or decrease of dissatisfaction are both theoretically trivial extensions of Part 1 of the theory; trivial in that they say no more than is already contained in that model. To be fair to the M-H practitioners they do not rest their case on this alternative; they are concerned only with the effects on performance and organizational efficiency. Job satisfaction is either a by-product or a step towards better efficiency. This may tell us something about the value system in which they operate but it in no way detracts from the validity of this method of testing their theory. One problem must now be faced. Does Part 2 of the theory depend on Part 1? According to House & Wigdor (1967, p.385) if the satisfaction-dissatisfaction dichotomy is false then Part 2 is ‘highly suspect’. I would argue that if Part 1 is false then Part 2 is irrelevant or must be argued on other grounds. If and only if Part 1 is true, then Part 2 can be tested using the concepts established by Part 1. Another serious difficulty for testing the validity of the theory is the fact that both parts stand on two legs. In Part 1, one leg identifies Motivators while the other identifies Hygienes; in Part 2 one leg predicts the effects of increasing the potency of Motivators while the other leg deals with changes in Hygienes. Does the theory claim that each part can stand on one leg at a time? If one investigator confirms the Motivator leg but not the Hygiene leg, does Part 1 of the theory stand or fall? And if another investigator follows with the opposite result, confirming Hygienes but not Motivators, does this increase or diminish our confidence in the theory? Similarly for Part 2 of the theory. In any case, testing the effect of putting more weight on the Motivators is a dubious procedure if this is the only change. The effects are not really surprising. The relative ineffectiveness of spending resources on Hygienes, which is what the theory also predicts, may surprise industrial welfare advocates but not cynical managers. In general terms, statements describing the theory are superficially similar and do not differ greatly from the way set out above. For instance: Whitsett & Winslow (1967, p.393) in explaining M-H theory say ‘dissatisfaction and those factors that contribute to dissatisfaction are separate and distinct from those factors that contribute to satisfaction. Satisfaction is not opposite from dissatisfaction for they operate on separate continua†¦ This is different from traditional thinking†¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢ As regards Part 2, House & Wigdor (1967, p.371) say ‘The second major hypothesis of the dual-factor theory of motivation is that the satisfiers are effective in motivating the individual to superior performance and effort, but the dissatisfiers are not’. Later they add (p.373) ‘If the dual-factor theory were correct, we should expect highly satisfied people to be highly motivated and to produce more’ which as they point out does not square with the evid ence. But though general statements are similar, precise statements, if made at all, are usually inconsistent or at variance with each other. Sometimes there is no argument—an author assumes that his understanding of the theory is the same as that of others. Or the research design indicates an underlying interpretation of the theory which may be similar to or quite different from that of another study which the author is supporting or refuting; but authors seem to be unaware of this. Arguments about what the theory says may be unspoken and have to be inferred. However, sometimes interpretations of the theory are set out in a way that makes possible comparisons with other interpretations. For example. House & Wigdor (1967) include a rank order of importance for the Motivators and for the Hygienes as part of the theory. This reflects the infiuence of Maslow upon Herzberg and may be a reasonable interpretation of Herzberg’s intention. On the whole it seems an unnecessary refinement that makes for extra complications when testing validity. Whitsett & Winslow (1967) accuse Burke (1966) of ‘A unique misinterpretation of the M-H theory . . . since M-H theory makes no claim that there should be  any fixed order of importance among either motivator or hygiene factors’ (p.41O). As it happens Burke makes no such claim either. Is overall job satisfaction part of the theory? Not according to Whitsett & Winslow (1967) who say: ‘One of the most common and persistent misinterpretations of the Motivation-Hygiene (M-H) theory is the attempt to use measures of overall job satisfaction to make statements purporting to be derived from the theory. The theory does not, and purposely does not, make statements about overall job satisfaction’ (p.395). In stating that job attitudes must be looked at twice (p.396) they are emphasizing Herzberg’s procedure of conducting separate sets of interviews for good critical incidents at work (revealing satisfaction and hence Motivators) and for bad critical incidents (revealing dissatisfaction and hence Hygienes). Perhaps the most systematic attempt to sort out what the theory really says was made by King (1970) who identified five distinct versions of Part 1 of the theory. Some versions are stronger than others because they entail them. King is not always sure that Herzberg was aware of these versions or which of them Herzberg was claiming to support. King classifies the evidence according to whether it is irrelevant or relevant to these theories, and then subdivides the relevant studies into those which support and those which refute any of thesefivetheories. Table 1 sets out King’s five distinct versions of Herzberg’s two-factor theory.

Okonkwo s Family And The Tribe - 1073 Words

become. Okonkwo is very hidebound about the British missionaries coming to the tribe, while everyone else is oblivious to the impact they make. The missionaries are what cause the demise of Okonkwo’s family and the Igbo â€Å"family† tribe. The missionaries cause a schism within the tribe, by converting the indigenous people to Christianity, which leads to dwindle relationships. This illustrates that â€Å"colonialism in Africa disrupted many things† which is germane to Okonkwo’s family and the tribe (Achebe Article). Okonkwo and Nwoye, despite their shared blood, there is no affection or mutual respect in their relationship anymore, and thus they are noisome of one another and no longer consider each other to be family. Together, these scenes exemplify how important it is to have mutual respect for each other in an Igbo family. In the first scene, Ikemefuna feels as if he is actually apart of Okonkwo’s family through the bond and respect he shares with Okonkwo; in the second scene, Nwoye and Okonkwo have miniscule to no respect for each other which is just enough for them to not even acknowledge one another as family. Ultimately, Achebe suggests that mutual relationships are needed in an ideal family. A dearth of respect transpires into its downfall. When one’s father and son share no respect, they invariably will breakdown. Just as Achebe exemplifies that mutual respect is what helps form a strong family, so too does unity help form the concrete basis of the ideal family. UnityShow MoreRelatedWhen Things Fall Apart By Chinua Achebe918 Words   |  4 PagesIn Chinua Achebe s fictional novel, When Things Fall Apart, the reader follows the story of a young man named Okonkwo. Okonkwo is a passionate leader of his tribe, the Igbo. Throughout the book he wishes to please the Igbo people, a one way he does that is by distancing himself from his father. To Okonkwo his father was a disgrace, lazy, poor and cowardice. Okonkwo is first seen wrestling and proving his worth to the tribe. He built his home and earned a reputation of a strong diligent farmer. HisRead MoreThings Fall Apart : A Representation Of Conquest964 Words   |  4 Pagesof the conquest of African tribes by Europeans in the late 19th century. Using a mixture of aggressive missionaries and turning tribesmen against their neighbors, we witness the deterioration of a culture. When the Commissioner talks about the people of Okonkwo s tribe, he sees them as savages. Not as a tribe with cultures, customs, and beliefs. He sees them as crude and uncultured, and finds their customs â€Å"incorrect†. This definitely fits the concept of the white man s duty, being the hero thatRead MoreAnalysis and Evaluation of Things Fall Apart.1219 Words   |  5 Pagestells the story of the life of the main character, Okonkwo, from an outside narrator. There are different spatial setting throughout the story including Iguedo and Mbanta while the temporal setting is at the turn of the 19th century. In the beginning of the story Okonkwo was one of them most respected men of his tribe and was constantly moving up the social ladder yearning to join the lords of the tribe. However, after committing crimes against the tribe such as breaking the sacred Week of Peace and committingRead MoreChinua Achebe s Things Falls Apart969 Words   |  4 Pagesby the British to the Umuof ia tribe. The Igbo community of Umuofia was led by a man named Okonkwo, who is the main character of this story. Okonkwo is a vigorous and brutal man. However, his fear of weakness leads him to tragedy. Okonkwo, the leader of the Umuofia tribe, is described as tall and massive. He is also powerful, and everyone respects him. Okonkwo is a prosperous farmer of yams with his three wives and multiple children. Even though many admire Okonkwo s strength and leadership, theyRead MoreChinua Achebe s Things Fall Apart1248 Words   |  5 Pages Chris Lowndes Ms. Cook A.P.L.C. 21 October 2015 We Are Family: Hardships in One s Family in Things Fall Apart Specific attributes correlate with each other to help create or not create the ideal strong family. However, through those attributes arise conflicts and major disputes. This issue of trying to achieve and create a strong family is of immense importance in one’s life, especially in Chinua Achebe’s, Things Fall Apart, a milestone in African literature. For instance, the father leaves hisRead MoreChinua Achebe s Things Fall Apart Essay1319 Words   |  6 Pageslife that force a person to change in order to survive. In Chinua Achebe’s novel Things Fall Apart, this especially applies to one character - Okonkwo. In the Ibo culture, the sons of a man inherit all of his things when he dies, but for Okonkwo that was nothing. Okonkwo’s father did nothing and was viewed as a very disgraceful man in the society, so all Okonkwo inherited was shame. He had to start from scratch and build his own huts, his own barn, and start his own farm. Furthermore, he had to be aRe ad More Analysis of Things Fall Apart Essay875 Words   |  4 PagesAnd within this area is Umuofia, which is where the Ogidi tribe lives. These people have beliefs that rest strongly on religion and faith in god. Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe takes a look at the life of an African tribe that has been isolated from the outer more technologically advanced world where science has become a part of religion proving that certain things live sickness are not caused by evil spirits. But the African tribe has no knowledge of this and they live in a society where thereRead MoreChinua Achebe s Things Fall Apart1169 Words   |  5 Pagesin the 19th century. Okonkwo, the protagonist, was a respected, strong leader of the Ibo clan providing for his three wives and their children. His father was a failure, making Okonkwo’s greatest fear being seen as a weak failure, but this also makes Okonkwo strive for success. â€Å"His whole life was dominated by fear, the fear of failure and o f weaknessâ€Å" (2. 12). With his drive to succeed, Okonkwo managed to make many poor decisions resulting in unwanted consequences. Okonkwo is an exact representationRead MoreChinua Achebe s Things Fall Apart1410 Words   |  6 Pagespre-colonized people of the Igbo tribe and their tribal leader Okonkwo. Achebe discuses early in the novel that the tribe is outlined by many rituals and values that they follow religiously. However, when the well-respected leader Okonkwo mistakenly breaks some of those values the tribe has no choice but to exile him. After Okonkwo leaves, the Igbo tribe learns about the visit of some unwelcomed white man and then things begin to fall apart. The story opens with the line â€Å"Okonkwo is a well-known throughoutRead MoreThings Fall Apart : A Great African Tragedy1727 Words   |  7 Pagesactions and flaws, and partly due to the will of a higher power. Like other characters of great tragedy, Okonkwo does have good characteristics. -Despite his actions at times, he does care for his family. He wants Nwoye, his son, to grow up tough and hardworking. He wants his daughter, Ezinma, to be safe. While he is extremely brash and hard on them, if he truly did not care, he would not try. Okonkwo has, and values, a great work ethic along with the courage and fighting spirit of a warrior. However