.
Wednesday, January 29, 2020
Metaphysics SHort essay 4 Essay Example for Free
Metaphysics SHort essay 4 Essay Price begins by describing how things we see in nature share elements. He explains how a tomato, sunset in the sky and a blushing face share nothing more in common than the color. However, some objects have many things in common. These objects group themselves together into Natural Kinds. Price describes a Natural Kind as a group of objects, which have many, perhaps indefinite, features in common. He explains that while this repetition makes things seem dull and monotonous, they are important because they are what makes conceptual cognition possible. In a world of incessant novelty, where there was no recurrence at all and no tedious repetitions, no concepts could ever be acquired. It would also make difficult the act of thinking because nothing would be recognizable. Price goes on to describe different terms of quality and relation. Quality is a recurrent feature of the world, which presents itself in individual object or events taken singly. Redness and bulginess are examples of this. A relation is a recurrent feature of the world, which presents itself in complexes of objects or events, such as this besides that, or between A and B. These terms allow us to give a simple analysis of change. Price explains how change has puzzled philosophers since the time of Heraclitus. Understanding objects in terms of quality and relation help us understand the concept of change. Another term that allows us to do so is the term ‘characteristics’. Characteristics are of at least two different types of qualities and relations. For Price, allow of this leads us to Aristotle’s theory of univeralia in rebus, or philosophy of universals. The philosophy of universals agrees that all objects characterized by x resemble one another. However once must be cautious and note the difference between exact resemblance in a certain aspect, and total or complete resemblance. While some have debated whether complete resemblance can be achieved, the important thing to note is the different intensities of resemblance that exist. Price goes on to list differences between the philosophy of resemblance and the philosophy of universals and deals with classical arguments against them both. Price concludes by saying that one must have a good knowledge of both. Since both can be misleading at times, when in danger of being misled by one of the theories, then can turn to the other for truth. D. C. Williams, on the other hand, comes out against the philosophy of universals in â€Å"The Element of Being. †He attempts to explain this in his example of the three lollipops. He tires to prove that when one says a is similar to b, one is only saying that a part of a is wholly similar to a part of b. He states that entities or abstract components are the primary constituents of this or any possible world. Many know these to be ‘abstract particulars’. Williams decides to name these parts tropes. He defines a trope as a particular entity either abstract or consisting of one or more concrete entities in combination with an abstraction. Tropes are connected to each other by way of location and by way of similarity. He goes on to explain and concludes by saying any possible world, and this one, is completely constituted by tropes and their connections of location and similarity. He explains how they would pertain to the notion of abstract and universal by using the example of Socrates (concrete particular), his wisdom (abstract particular/trope), Socratesity (concrete universal) and all of the wisdom (abstract universal). He goes on to explain how tropes would apply to different areas of philosophy, such as the philosophy of knowledge. He concludes by saying that all the things we see are no universal but consist of parts, tropes, which these things are a part of. Williams differs from Price by stating that objects consist of tropes and they are what create these appearances or similiarties. Price on the other hand states that objects share a certain resemblance in quality, relation and characteristics. Resemblance Theory and Trope Theory Carlos Manuel Jordan PHI 3500 Metaphysics December, 4 2014.
Tuesday, January 21, 2020
A Quantitative and Qualitative Look at Southwest Airlines and British Airways :: Airlines Marketplace Aviation Benchmarking
A Quantitative and Qualitative Look at Southwest Airlines and British Airways In today's competitive marketplace, all firms are seeking ways to improve their overall performance. One such method of improvement, recently adopted by many firms, is benchmarking. Benchmarking is a technique used to evaluate internal business processes. "In this analysis, managers determine the firm's critical processes and outputs, baseline those processes, then compare the performance of each process against a standard outside the industry" (Bounds, Yorks, Adams, & Ranney 1994). To effectively improve a business process to world-class quality, managers must find a firm that is recognized as a global leader, not just the industry standard. Successful benchmarking requires tailor-made solutions, not just blind copying of another organization. Measurement and interpretation of data collected is the key to creating business process solutions. "Benchmarking's real role has to be seen in the context of the organization that is continuously implementing improvement" (Bendell, Boulter, & Goodstadt 1998). Organizations implementing the benchmarking process are continuously looking to improve, and planning improvement. Improvements can be made by looking at the firm both internally and externally. Internal improvements are implemented by analyzing processes and setting targets for performance. However, output performance measures are not able to help management understand why a practice is effective. This understanding is a result of personal interpretation of the process. Organizations must look to other firms for ideas to borrow from global leaders, regardless of the scope of the necessary improvement. Equally important as data collection is the actual implementation of the newly acquired business practice. The most important aspect of benchmarking is to enable companies to employ the best business practices. This fundamental theory cannot be overstated. Global competition is growing due to the technological boom. The expansion of the Internet and digital communication has forced once domestic firms to consider foreign competitors. To remain ahead, companies are realizing they must match or exceed the business practices of the best in the world. "The only way that we can drive our organizations to excellence is to ensure that we keep our eyes on our competitors and world best practice in all aspects of business" (Bendell, Boulter, & Goodstadt 1998). Benchmarking should not be considered simply a tool of management, but rather an integral part of the business strategy of a firm. When implementing benchmarking, management must consider the overall issues of performance and process re-engineering. A Quantitative and Qualitative Look at Southwest Airlines and British Airways :: Airlines Marketplace Aviation Benchmarking A Quantitative and Qualitative Look at Southwest Airlines and British Airways In today's competitive marketplace, all firms are seeking ways to improve their overall performance. One such method of improvement, recently adopted by many firms, is benchmarking. Benchmarking is a technique used to evaluate internal business processes. "In this analysis, managers determine the firm's critical processes and outputs, baseline those processes, then compare the performance of each process against a standard outside the industry" (Bounds, Yorks, Adams, & Ranney 1994). To effectively improve a business process to world-class quality, managers must find a firm that is recognized as a global leader, not just the industry standard. Successful benchmarking requires tailor-made solutions, not just blind copying of another organization. Measurement and interpretation of data collected is the key to creating business process solutions. "Benchmarking's real role has to be seen in the context of the organization that is continuously implementing improvement" (Bendell, Boulter, & Goodstadt 1998). Organizations implementing the benchmarking process are continuously looking to improve, and planning improvement. Improvements can be made by looking at the firm both internally and externally. Internal improvements are implemented by analyzing processes and setting targets for performance. However, output performance measures are not able to help management understand why a practice is effective. This understanding is a result of personal interpretation of the process. Organizations must look to other firms for ideas to borrow from global leaders, regardless of the scope of the necessary improvement. Equally important as data collection is the actual implementation of the newly acquired business practice. The most important aspect of benchmarking is to enable companies to employ the best business practices. This fundamental theory cannot be overstated. Global competition is growing due to the technological boom. The expansion of the Internet and digital communication has forced once domestic firms to consider foreign competitors. To remain ahead, companies are realizing they must match or exceed the business practices of the best in the world. "The only way that we can drive our organizations to excellence is to ensure that we keep our eyes on our competitors and world best practice in all aspects of business" (Bendell, Boulter, & Goodstadt 1998). Benchmarking should not be considered simply a tool of management, but rather an integral part of the business strategy of a firm. When implementing benchmarking, management must consider the overall issues of performance and process re-engineering.
Sunday, January 12, 2020
Punishment And Crime Essay
â€Å"An eye for an eye†¦Ã¢â‚¬ The standards by which individuals and society subscribe to where being done wrong and seeking retribution, or in the general scope, where crime and punishment is concerned, can be summed up and approximated in the aforementioned line. Our view of justice, the resolution of a violation, and the prevention thereof doesn’t stray far from the said concept either. While other countries, particularly those in the middle eastern region, tolerate and employ the said ideology in the literal sense, mutilating the arms and limbs of people caught guilty of thievery, for instance. In the much more ‘civilized’ and ‘developed’ nation that is our country however, the instance of ‘Retribution,’ ‘Deterrence,’ ‘Rehabilitation,’ and ‘Societal Protection’ exists as corresponding forms of punishment to violations against humanity and against society’s prescribed laws. Its eff ectivity in terms of deterring crime, however, remains subjective.            The concept of retribution or retributive justice exists under the premise that people are, or should be dealt with a punishment which fits in proportion to their respective crimes. The concept of ‘merit’ and ‘desert’ are introduced as factors central to retributive justice (Maiese). The simplest explanation would be that if a person where to do ‘good’ and work hard, his or her actions will be met with an equal amount of goodness, or reward. Conversely, a person who commits to doing the opposite, who breaks laws and violates aspects of humanity, are to receive a form of punishment equal to what they have inflicted. Where the instance of ‘merit’ and ‘desert’ is concerned, justice is defined by dealing a person the corresponding reward or punishment which he or she deserves based on the instance of ‘good’ and ‘bad,’ ‘right’ and ‘wron g’ courses of action which a person chooses to pursue.            Punishment in retributive justice constitutes the previously quoted line in the introduction of this paper, albeit not as literally; which, in the context of almost every justice system, and to put it quite crudely, people are to be treated in the same manner by which they choose to treat other individuals. This much is evident in the amount of community service, jailtime, and other forms of punishment which an offender is obliged to fulfill depending on the gravity of the crimes or offenses he or she has committed. Crimes and offenses which may range from driving without a license to armed robbery, rape, and perhaps even murder, will determine whether the offender in question will receive a simple reprimand, a ticket or a fine, a day in a jail cell, or be committed to minimum or maximum security, and to the most grave of offenses, receive capital punishment or death penalty.            The theory of deterrence on the other hand, departs from the seeming reasonable sensibilities afforded by the concept of retribution and runs under the idea that if a corresponding consequence or punishment of a crime outweighs the possible benefit or significance of committing it, the person who intends to commit the said crime may be deterred from pursuing it.            Deterrence turns to the instance of heavier consequences to criminal acts and offenses as opposed to punishments proportionate to actions which have been committed, as a more effective way of preventing individuals from committing crimes. The theory of deterrence runs under the premise and assumption that every individual is conscious of his or her actions, that people are consciously aware of what constitutes ‘good’ and ‘evil’ and that people’s action, be it of deviance or conformity, subscribing to rules or breaking it, results from free will. Under the said assumptions, people who are inclined to break the law or commit to similar acts of violations are aware of the consequence and gravity of the situation. Knowing that the corresponding consequences will have a greater negative impact than the deviance and offenses they may choose to commit will advise them to do otherwise. In the instance that people are blamed or convicted for crimes and offenses they did not commit, punishments would appear greater than they already are. For most people, this appears to be the most effective way of deterring crime, but it also appears to be the least humane and insensible where offenders are concerned.            On the subject of relatively ‘humane’ methods of punishment, the concept of rehabilitation seems to effectively apply. A term which probably closesly identifies with drug abuse, excessive smoking, eating disorders, and other behavioral problems, the concept of rehabilitation applies to more than the said destructive behaviors and relates to a type of punishment which confines an individual to a place where he or she is unable to repeat offenses and untolerated acts which he or she has previously committed.            Rehabilitation turns to a less immediate and much lengthier process of ‘punishing’ the criminal or offender in question. ‘Doing time’ in prison cells and rehabilitation centers may appear the most tame and seemingly weak or ineffective forms of punishment, but the reality of incarceration, of being put away and shut out from the rest of society, and rotting away in a period of time which appear to span indefinitely, bears it own share of torment.            The said form of punishment has the capacity to affect the offender in question on a psychological level, as he or she is forced to contemplate the nature of his or her actions and its consequences in the course of the said person’s confinement and rehabilitation, at the end of which the individual in question is released and deemed fit to continue his or her life and start anew. Crimes are supposed to be deterred by keeping people away from society at large, who may choose to repeat the said crimes or influence others from doing the same.            Societal Protection concerns itself with the rights and needs of the society as a whole, as opposed to individuals which comprise it, and turning to forms of punishment such as the previously mentioned rehabilitation, among others, as a means of protecting and preserving roles, function, structures, and procesess within society.            Ultimately, society and individuals within it do what they can to ensure security, peace and stability from ensuing and taking hold. Not every form of punishment that has been discussed can be deemed rational and effective in every aspect, and they can vary in meaning and translation from one individual to the next. But as far as opinions apply, it exists as the least of surprises how certain forms of evil can’t be countered and put off by other forms of evil. Retribution will not solve people and society’s problems, and forms of punishment, however necessary, unfortunately only reflect society’s capacity to inflict pain and suffering to people who may or may not truly deserve them. References     Keel, Robert. â€Å"Rational Choice and Deterrence Theory.†14 July 2005. Retrieved 18 January 2008 from http://www.umsl.edu/~keelr/200/ratchoc.html     Maiese, Michelle. â€Å"Types of Justice.†July 2003. Retrieved 18 January 2008 from            http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/types_of_justice/     Maiese, Michelle. â€Å"Retributive Justice.†May 2004. Retrieved 18 January 2008 from            http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/retributive_justice/     Summerfield, Morgan. â€Å"Evolution of Deterrence Crime Theory.†18 May 2006. Retrieved   18 January 2008 from  http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/32600/
Saturday, January 4, 2020
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)