“The myth of Sisyphus’ by Camus and Existentialism by Sartre

             The French philosopher Albert Camus (1913-1960) is of a different opinion to that of Sartre in regards to philosophy and politics of existentialism. The most striking contradiction is the conception of the absurd. Camus's opinion coincides with that of Kierkegaard and Nietzsche in that absurdity is a result of the absence of God while for Sartre it belongs to a world before the activity of the consciousness. Camus suggests that without embracing God, there is an acute discrepancy between the world and human aspirations. The “The myth of Sisyphus” highlights a Greek myth of a character punished by the gods to push a rock up a mountain for all eternity only for it to roll back down to the bottom. It elucidates the concept of the absurd. It bases its argument that the world is not rational. Therefore, the only option is for a man to deal with this irrationality in the course of pursuit of happiness and reason (Spelletich, 2003 p.1). The absurdity arises from this conflict between human aspirations and the irrationality in the world.

            Absurdity raises the issue of suicide and the meaning of life becoming the “truly serious philosophical problem”. The myth paints a potent image of futility. Camus responds to this by suggesting lucid recognition of the absurdity of existence to liberate one from belief in another life-permitting one to live for the moment, pleasure, beauty, and grandeur of existence. He defines suicide as having clarity and courage of mind that eliminates comfort illusions and self-deceit. Camus’s lucidity is comparable to Sartre’s anguish, but in the end is more positive than the latter (Ann, 1999 p.2). Camus imagines that Sisyphus must be happy because he rolls the rock up the mountain again and again despite being a futile exercise. According to Sartre, judging whether life is truly worth living amounts to providing answers to a fundamental question of philosophy. Other aspects of life come afterward. In truth, it is a futile question. Others die because they judge life is not worth living while others get killed for their ideas, which give them a reason for living (Spelletich, 2003 p.1). Sartre, thus, concludes that the meaning of life is the most pertinent question to answer.

             Camus argues that there no idea worth dying for. He takes suicide as a kind of confession in response to one's inability to deal with the world's absurdity. It is the absurdity that transforms a familiar world into an exile. However, suicide is not a legitimate answer to tackling the absurd. Camus questions further and arrives at positivity and defeat of the absurd as the answer. He firmly states the real effort lies not in committing suicide or hope for another life but facing the absurd face to face and triumphing.

            Camus agrees with Sartre that man is limited in reasoning, which makes it insufficient in clearing the irrationality of the world. Sartre observes that the world is fine and arranged till one's hopes and dreams conflict an irrational world at which point their world’s cracks and tumbles. When faced with these realities, a reliable answer is a belief in one’s self. According to Camus the strongest evidence of this concept is the physical sciences. He realizes that even sciences that boast of clarity and rationality ultimately borrow on poetry, art, or metaphor (Camus, 1955 p. 5). He suggests that even intelligent thinkers conclude that the world is absurd. However, it would be a mistake to view the world or the human world as absurd. The realization of the conflict between the world and man is what assists in clarifying individual desires. Camus believes in the three elements: the world, the man, and the absurd, which are inseparable. Without one, the others cannot function properly (Bialor & Cosman, 1956 p. 5). Man wants to make sense of the world, but it cannot make sense enabling one to see the absurd through the conflict.

             Revolt is the only logical consequence of the absurd according to Camus. An absurd man is ready to accept death rather than philosophical and physical suicide. The value of life is through revolt, devoid of unapproachable hope and confusion. He concurs like Sartre and explains that the absurd liberates man and facilitates them to achieve freedom of thought and action (Daniel & Daniel, 2007 p.13). Camus is not against the Sartre in that he tends to concur with his atheistic existential philosophy, as they both talk about the same kind of freedom. Achieving consciousness by rejecting all outer rules represents the first step to achieving absurd freedom (Ann, 1999 p.2). However, Camus objects to existential preaching alluding to spiritual leap to escape consciousness.

            The second consequence of the absurdity hence is freedom. In relation to the third consequence, which is passion, he opines that in an absurd world what counts is the most living rather than best living. Therefore, rather than committing suicide, one should face the absurd with courage, full consciousness, and revolt to attain passion and freedom. Camus uses the mythical character of Sisyphus to provide responses to the absurd. He compares him to the workman of today who works on the same tasks every day without complaining. After analyzing "the myth of Sisyphus" it can plausible to argue that Camus's philosophy of tension of the absurd is one of the limitations (Bialor & Cosman, 1956 p. 4). The myth ends in optimism rather than pessimism devoid of the hope for another life and regard for an irrational world. It is better to live and revolt rather than commit physical or philosophical suicide.

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

Ann, P. (19 9). Apostles of Sartre. Existentialism in America. Northwestern University Press.

Bialor, P., & Cosman, M. (1956). Two Views of Camus. Chicago Review, 10(3), 91-97. doi:10.2307/25293259

Camus, A. (1955). The Myth of Sisyphus and other stories.  Dhspriory.org. 2020. [online] Available at: <http://dhspriory.org/kenny/PhilTexts/Camus/Myth%20of%20Sisyphus-.pdf> [Accessed 15 May 2020].

DANIEL, D. M., & DANIEL, D. M. (2007). Sartres existentialism and humanism. Scm Press

Spelletich, K. (2003). The Myth of Sisyphus. Leonardo, 36(5), 359-359. Retrieved May 15, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/1577508

1027 Words  3 Pages

 Marx- alienation

Introduction

 In the interpretation of capitalism, Marx reveals how society is developed, how it works, and the relationship between human beings and products and activities.  In the theory of alienation, Marx is individual-centered, or in other words, he focuses on how workers struggle and use their labor-power to build the society yet they end up being controlled by employers.  Note that Marx discusses alienation in different forms and all occur as a result of private property and capitalism. In a capitalist society, workers are used as a means of production. Workers struggle for production believing that in the end, they will achieve happiness and fulfilled life.  However, the workers do not achieve the American Dream or the self-realization but what happens is that they experience alienation. Capitalism creates a division of labor and this results in the alienation of labor. Capitalism controls the economy, and works do not have the power to control the products they have produced.  Workers are alienated from productive activities since their human ability is limited.  Finally, workers are alienated from each other. Rather than cooperating to transform the world, they create their opposing competition for jobs. Thus, under capitalism, the objectification of labor is to separate the workers from wealth and technology and as a result, workers lose the reality of leading fulfilled and meaningful lives.

 

Capitalism interfere with the fulfillment of the good life

 First, capitalism interferes with the fulfillment of the good life. This is because capitalists have three objectives; first to treat workers as the means of production, to increase the surplus, and to alienate the workers from the products of labor (RAINES, 2002, p.120). When the worker enters in the labor, they put more effort but the more they work hard the less they belong to the products of labor. In other words, the greater the activity, the fewer the products they possess.  The separation of the worker from the products means that the labor becomes external or while working, workers feel unhappy since there is no connection between them and the work. They lack mental and physical energy since they are involved in forced labor.  They are used as a mean to an end and this means that the labor does not belong to them (RAINES, 2002, p.121). The worker cannot lead a fulfilling life since he feels like he is treated like an animal. While working, he does realize the genuine human functions since, in a real sense, there is no relationship between the worker and the act of production, and there is no relation between the worker and the product of labor. Therefore, throughout the labor, the workers do not have self-realization. There is no sense of meaning, self-worth, happiness, and wellbeing (RAINES, 2002, p.121).   Instead, the worker suffers from emotional distress and he is denied a good life. Capitalist ideologies are indeed the principal obstacles to human freedom. This is because, capitalism focuses on competition, free economy, private property, wage labor, profit motive, and more. However, these ideologies are the source of alienation where the individual worker is denied the freedom to enjoy the products the labor.  Workers are exploited and used as a mere machine.

 From the Hegelian perspective, Marx asserts that there are opposing forces in an economic system and these forces oppose ideas generated by human beings. The positive side of a capitalist society is that it increases living standards and more workers are employed (Pressman, 2002, p.48). However, the capitalist system exploits workers since its interest is on constant capital or sources of production, variable capital or the wage bill, and surplus value or the value of the products (Pressman, 2002, p.48). In essence, capitalist buys labor and machines that will be used in the production of goods and sell the goods to achieve surplus value.  Since the workers do not have the capital to support themselves, they are used as the means of production to produce something of value and to enrich their employers. Capitalists ensure a higher surplus by increasing working hours, increasing work intensity, and reducing the wage bill. Workers produce more goods and get fewer wages (Pressman, 2002, p.48). Firms can exploit workers since they do not have the power to leave the work but they endure the physical and mental torture. Also, competition is high and the exploitation becomes intense since it is the only strategy that firms can use to survive in a competitive environment.  What followed after exploitation is alienation.

 

Worker's alienation from the product

  The capitalists' objectification of labor is that as workers produce wonderful things, they end up poor, ugly, and living a non-beautiful life. After completing the work of production, workers are seen as boring despite the wealth they produce (MORRISON, 2006, p.122). They do not have control over the products in that the capitalists ensure that the produced goods are consumed immediately. In other words, the role of the workers is to produce the products whereas the owner controls the products in purchase and sales. Thus, the product alienation occurs since after production, the product is detached from the worker and it becomes alien or unrelated to the worker who creates it.  In fact, workers do not take pride in the products they produce.

Worker's alienation from the activity of the labor

 The capitalists' objectification of labor is also to ensure that the worker is alienated from the labor. Note that the means of production is also privately owned. Even if the worker is the means of production, he does not produce the goods directly. Note that workers are creative and expect the employers to give them the freedom to control the environment where the production is taking place (MORRISON, 2006, p.124). However, capitalists view the production as a monotonous task. Capitalists do not see the need for strengthening the worker's potential but rather, they believe that they own the means of production. Note that workers sell their labor and thus they have no control. Workers have no relation with how they produce and this means that they do not have the productive powers because labor is an object.

 

Workers' alienation from human species

 This means that as the capitalists own the labor power, the worker losses individual freedom. They are alienated from their conscious mental being and therefore they are not conscious of themselves (MORRISON, 2006, p.125). They only have a physical being like animals. Capitalisms believe that in the production of goods, workers do not have consciousness and they act physically. They labor like animals since their mental ability is not recognized.

 

Workers alienation from other humans

 This means that workers are not involved in social labor but they participate in alienated labor. Social labor means that workers create social groups and harmonies unity. However, capitalism destroyed human nature and it does have the essence of a human or it does not recognize his existence. Capitalism transforms social relationships to economic relationships (MORRISON, 2006, p.126).They make sure that workers are alienated from the social community so that they can work as separate individuals in achieving the economic goals.  Workers no longer work as collective beings but they work separately. Workers are also alienated from other human beings since the capitalists create two classes; the producers and benefactors.  The benefactors are characterized by wealth and beauty whereas the producers are characterized by poverty and deprivation. 

 

Conclusion

 Capitalists believe that the only way they can achieve economic prosperity is through private ownership. They also believe that labor will help them create property and value.   However, other economics believe that if labor creates property and increases value, it needs to be improved. This is because almost all products used by people are as a result of labor effort.  Conversely, capitalists alienate and exploit the labor so that they can achieve the private ownership.  Capitalists alienate workers from other humans, they alienate them from their active function, and they alienate them from their individual life. Workers are seen as a machine yet the capitalists focus on strengthening their relationship with the products of labor. Workers do not gain benefit simply because capitalists owns everything including the means of production and the products. There is no relationship between the workers and the capitalists and the only thing that connects them is the commodity. Workers are seen as mere objects and they do not have control in all aspects of life. Alienation leads to the class struggle between the capitalists and the workers.

 

 

References

 

Pressman Steven. (2002). Fifty Major Economists. Routledge

 

RAINES, J. (2002). Marx on Religion. Philadelphia, Temple University Press. http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=449829.

 

MORRISON, K. (2006). Marx, Durkheim, Weber: formations of modern social thought. London,

Sage.

 

 

1455 Words  5 Pages

 

Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe

Reflecting

             Everything about this book is fantastic, and I decided to reflect on it and write about what I learned. Teens experience physical and cognitive development. In most cases, these changes are influenced by the environment they live in or how they relate with family and friends. From the reading, I have realized that family relationship and friendship during adolescence play a significant role in shaping the life of teens. Note that during adolescents, teens need social interactions from friends and families. This is the period at which they realize one's self, personality, and self-esteem. Aristotle feels lonely since his older brother is in prison, and his father has PTSD.  However, he meets a friend known as Dante, whom they interact and creates an intense friendship. However, they differ in that his friend Dante is knowledgeable or he knows much about the world, whereas Ari does not know how the world looks like since he stays with unloving parents, especially his father. On the other hand, Dante enjoys parental love.  I want to reflect on the reading focusing on Ari's point of view and say that through Dante, Ari discovers the secrets of the universe. The reason as to why I use Ari as the main character is because, in the beginning, he feels isolated and lonely. His life is characterized by isolating experience not only in his family but also outside the world.  Note that family dynamic plays an important role in a teen's life, but from Ari's perspective, his family is dysfunctional simply because his father is in denial. However, their interaction between Ari and Dante brings differences in that they realize their manhood and self-worth. Through sharing thoughts and actions, they discover the truths about themselves. The script has concluded that the novel centers on family relationship, friendship and love, and self-discovery. 

Friendship and love, and self-discovery are three important things in the life of teens. We all know that friendship plays an important role in adolescences as it helps them develop a sense of belonging and increase self-esteem (Saenz, 13).  Ari and Dante story reveals that teenage relationship reduces anxiety and depression, contributes to emotional regulation, and improves cognitive function. There is evidence in the novel that teenage relationship has helped Ari gain mental health in that since childhood, he has been in a chaotic setting, or he was raised in an unstable family where he lacked parental and sibling's love (Saenz, 13). Thus, he was traumatized but later, he met Dante who helped him gain self-worth. I have learned that close friendships help teens gain positive social development. The latter is enhanced by unconditional support and caring. Dante made a difference in Ari's life in that he helped him cope with the stress that he experienced in his family background.  For example, Ari says that “I started feeling sorry for myself” (Saenz, 13). Note that Ari could not interact with other teenagers and he only watched them passing on their bikes until he went to the swimming and met Dante. It is worth saying that Ari’s life changed at this point in that both were empathetic and compelling characters who shared their memories and learned more about the universe

The text is beautifully written, and I can tell everyone to read it. While reading, the character reminds me of the role of friendship not only in shaping an individual's life but also in changing society. Note that the main character is in a depressive state, but as he meets Dante, they create a special bond (Saenz, 13). Ari states that he could not interacts with his twin sisters, his brother, his mom, and his dad.  However, one day he went to swimming and met Dante who they swam and read books together.  Ari is happy that Dante teaches him swimming lessons. In addition, Dante says that '… This from a guy who loves Conrad's Heart of Darkness'. (Saenz, 13).  This indicates that Dante is intellectual, and the intellectualism strength has a relationship. Note that through the connection, Ari enjoys reading and writing and more importantly, he can discover the secrets of the universe. Initially, Ari enjoyed reading, but as he meets Dante, he gains physical and emotional strength. This means that he does not become physically and emotionally active, but he also discovers the worlds by discussing philosophical questions. The important thing to note is that Ari and Dante defy all odds and develops a special relationship that not only helps them know each other, but it helps them discover the truth of their lives.  The reading depicts the power of friendship that helps them discover the secrets of the universe.

At the end of the summer, the two boys not only discover the universe, but they discover their identity. Initially, they did not understand what it means to be a man, but through interaction and sharing, they discover the Mexican identity.  Another thing that helps the two boys discover the world is their family relationship. For example, Ari's family is silent and ignorant. On the other hand, Dante's family is communicative and supportive. This means that Ari experienced trauma during childhood, but when he meets Dante, he learns that communication plays an important role in life as it helps him heal from the trauma (Saenz, 13). Note that Ari copes with trauma through silence or in other words, there is no open communication. For example, Ari's older brother is in prison, but Aris says that his parent was indifferent or they did not show a family's concern. They behaved like their son does not exist and this reveals the sense of secrecy. Note that Ari's father participated in the Vietnam War and after the war, he could not speak anything to Ari, and this made Ari feel that he is alone in the universe (Saenz, 13). Ari's mother says that his father stays silence because of the trauma he experienced during   the war.  However, this affects Ari in that he also suffers indirectly because his father is not available to teach him about life lesson and more importantly about adulthood.

On the other hand, Dante enjoys family interaction, and in case of any problem, his family is always available to offer affection and support (Saenz, 41). Remarkably, as Ari socialized with Dante, he communicates openly and more importantly, Dante interacts with Ari's family. Eventually, Ari's dad talks open about everything, including his involvement Vietnam way, his brother who in prison, and his aunt, who was a lesbian. This remarkably shapes Ari's life in that he releases the anger and recovers from trauma. One night, Dante's parents move together with Dante and Ari to the desert. Ari liked the way Dante had a strong with his family. He says that "I wondered what my father would do if I ever went to him and kissed… (Saenz, 42). This indicates that since childhood, Ari desired to have open communication with his father. Unfortunately, he grew to find that his father is silent.  However, the coming of age or the transition from childhood to adulthood helps Ari discover the reality concerning his entire family. Note that at the beginning, Ari is lonely and to make the matter worse, he does not know anything about his family (Saenz, 42). However, his relationship with Dante helps him understand his family function. Another important thing that I have learned is that friendship does not help him come in good terms with his family, but he changes his thoughts and actions. It is important to note that the relationship has a strong effect on the life of people. Therefore, it is important to make wise choices of friends and most importantly, be true to yourself.  I have learned that Ari meets many teens, but he evaluates them and makes friends with the best person who helps him realizes self-worth. They share values; they read books together, they swim together, among other activities (Saenz, 42). Ari gained emotional and social growth that changes his life completely. Therefore, social interaction between peer groups changes behavior either positively and negatively, but the most important thing is true friendship. I have also learned that parents play a significant role during the development of a child, and therefore, it is important for parents to ensure parental love for their teens. They should maintain attachment through effective communication so that the teens can feel secured and develop self-worth.

 

Conclusion

 Aristotle and Dante's story is a sweet story that reveals much about friendship.  Ari is the main character whose voice is deep but who is controlled by anger.  Ari is not conformable with his adulthood since his father, who could teach him about masculinity, remained silent after participating in the Vietnam War. However, he struggles to change everything. Including his family culture and his identity. Up to this point, it is important to note that adolescents struggle with self-esteem. Parents need to be a role of the model to their children by showing them love. Note that adolescents look for sustainable adult love, and parents should honor their desires and strengthen the attachments. Parents need to form an enduring relationship with their teens to help them gain mental health. Rather than become silent and irritable, parents should strengthen the social bond and maintain a constructive partnership. It is worth saying the power of friendship helped Ari develop self-worth and expand the horizon. More importantly, the reading has revealed that friendship shape the lives of teens in that the love makes them feel more understood and accepted. Close friendship is important since it allows youths to share values and attitudes and to move out of their comfort zone to explore the worlds. In the beginning, I did not understand the two characters but later, I came to learn that the attraction and affection between them. I enjoyed reading this book, and I would recommend it to anyone who is struggling with self-discovery and self-worth.

 

 

 

Work cited

  Saenz A. Benjamin. Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe.  Simon and Schuster, 2012

1683 Words  6 Pages

 

THE MEANING OF LIFE

 

In real life, we as humankind, are the conception of a mystical entity and this supernatural being created us while having an intelligent purpose and this purpose is “the meaning of life". Various major historical icons in philosophy have given a reaction to the question of what makes life important and if anything makes life meaningful. In this text, the focus will be in the book The Meaning of Life by Klemke and Cahn that gives a clear introduction to this philosophy. The book starts with the affirmation and acknowledgment of God where it starts by denoting that without faith in God life has no meaning. It contains the work of many philosophers who are trying to explain what life is. Albert Camus is one of the philosophers with his essay on the Myth of Sisyphus.

 The central concern of The Myth of Sisyphus is what Camus calls "the absurd" (Klemke & Cahn 2008 p 80). He claims that life is unreasonable and pointless. Camus claims that there is an important struggle amid what we need from the universe and what we get in the world. He describes Sisyphus as an absurd hero, he was the founder and first ruler of Ephyra, and he was clever but wicked and full of greed and deceit. He violated the sanctified laws of hospitality by killing travelers. He also annoyed all the gods by deceiving them and avoiding death twice. He was lastly taken to the underworld and punished by the gods with a lifetime task to move a rock up the mountain which eventually rolled back down because of its weight. Camus compared this myth with actual life whereas humans we must struggle without hope of success. We will by no means find in life itself the meaning that we need to find. In one or the other, we will notice that meaning through spring of faith, by putting our faiths in a god away from this world, or we will settle our thoughts with a notion that life is meaningless.

Life has a meaning when an individual acquires everything he desires in life, but this is a rare case to most of us as humans since disappointments are more than appreciations. A big percentage in the world are those that toil hard to get just consumption food leave alone the savings and investments. This is the reason people see life as meaningless for they have nothing to show to the world as the fruits of their hard work. They are just busybodies who cannot have anything substantial but life itself. In some instances those who work hard get little compared to those who put less effort in life this comes along with the notion of the difference between working hard and working smart. This theory has led to a lot of people in viewing life as meaningless. We are forced to rely on and have faith in supernatural beings for their provision but unless we work there is nothing that is freely given in this world.

           All humans have fate in life, once a person is born it is obvious that he will one day die. This notion makes life as well as activities that humans engage in more meaningless. People work hard to better their lives and not forgetting that this is our desire (to make our lives better) but we forget that we will lose it someday. This does not mean that we should not live anymore, according to Camus “suicide is of little use to us, as there can be no more meaning in death than in life” (Klemke & Cahn 2008 p 165). From the above information, the idea of the meaning of life becomes difficult to expound and hence the urgency to review from this article the meaning of life. We live blindly not knowing what will happen tomorrow as it brings us closer to death.

Camus depicted religion as a way of blinding humans because the religious expectation is founded on the wrong faith that demise, in the sense of the destruction of soul and body, is not unavoidable. He continues to say that religion is even worse because it shows us how we can look to a different side of life to something to that will come later, such spiritual assurance destroys a part of us. Camus is neither a disbeliever nor a relativist in this text his argument rests on the self-confirmation of intense understanding. He supports exactly what he takes Christianity, to avoid living a life of the intellects, passionately, here and in the present-day. This involves, first, forsaking all hope for a life after death, definitely declining thinking about it. He claims that “I do not want to trust that death is the opening to another life. For me, it is a locked door” (Klemke & Cahn 2008 p 106). The fact death is real and as humans we must accept it he claims that it does not most extremely commend not only the physical side of life but also the interpersonal side. Contrary to an unprovable faith in God and life after death, he suggests that human should take these into account “To feel one’s ties to a property, one’s love for men, or to know there is always a place where the heart can find rest many certainties for one man’s life”.

Absurd drives Camus's question about suicide, but his way of ensuing arouses a different kind of absurdity, the absurd responsiveness. According to Camus, people commit suicide since they criticize life as not worth living (Klemke & Cahn 2008). Camus also contemplates that it is absurd to try to understand, know or describe the world, for he depicts the effort to gain lucid knowledge as fruitless. For he cannot tell what life is even with the knowledge he has and with it, he cannot even escape death. Here Camus places himself against philosophy and science, discharging the assertions of all systems of lucid study: “That general reason, ethical or practical, that determinism, those categories that explain everything are enough to make a decent man laugh” (Klemke & Cahn 2008     p 111). All these are some of the reasons humans see life as meaningless but he finally asserts that suicide is not the solution to those absurd.

Camus though termed suicide as a bad decision since life has more meaning than death, he uses revolt as an alternative to suicide. “It may be thought that suicide follows revolt – but wrongly. … Revolt gives value to life. … To a man devoid of blinders, there is no finer sight than that of the intelligence at grips with a reality that transcends it” (Klemke & Cahn 2008 p 128). He responds to the question of suicide with what an individual should do, these actions are; having full awareness of life, eluding dishonest explanations such as religion, declining to surrender to any belief, and continuing with liveliness and strength. According to him, this is how a life lacking crucial meaning can be turned to a worth living life. As stated in the myth, Sisyphus agrees and holds to living with death shorn of the likelihood of alluring to god. He developed happiness amidst his fate because it belongs to him. “His fate belongs to him. His rock is his thing” (Klemke & Cahn 2008 p 154). Sisyphus is conscious of his fate and he rephrases it into a situation of “wholly human origin” (Klemke & Cahn 2008 p 81). This may look like an amplification, since in the end, death is unavoidable and dreadful, but by admitting this, Sisyphus intentionally lives out what has been forced on him, thus making it into his end.

The ideas of Camus in the meaning of life show his position in life, in some points he looks strong and in other instances he is weak. The fact that he acknowledges the existence of supreme beings on earth and at the same time he dishonors them and he cannot support his position is a sign of weakness. He then regards life as meaningless and he neither supports suicide is another sign of being uncertain hence a weakness. On the other hand, Camus is a bit principled he is not being controlled by other theories concerning the meaning of life. He indeed has the information about other beliefs but that does not change his opinion in life, he even condemns how Christians are brainwashed by their religion on the aspect of life after death.

From the Myth of Sisyphus one can allude to the conclusion that, regardless of what our situations are, even though they are inflexible if we admit it charitably, happiness can still be found in life?  As humans we should exercise acceptance and try to take our pain and make it our resolution in life, we all have a fate but it should not control us or hinder us from being happy in life. We have to live our lives with passion, strength, embrace freedom, and be rebellious to the consequences of the absurd lest we give in to untrue hope. We have to embrace life with its challenges and prove to the world the meaning of life. Nothing should sway us from our aim in this life, our perceptions about life impacts the meaning in life to us.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reference

Klemke, E. D., & Cahn, S. M. (2008). The meaning of life: A reader.

1574 Words  5 Pages

 Philosophy of Education

 

Introduction

Philosophy is a belief that is used to guide someone’s behavior and normally used for academic discipline. Philosophy of education is a statement used to identify the beliefs and values of a person in matters concerning education.

According to Rhalmi (2018), philosophy is obtained from two words that mean love and wisdom meaning that it is the love for wisdom to find the truth. Philosophy of education is the study of ideas that affect education. It describes different approaches used in teaching and learning. Philosophy of education originated from ideas and values that do not change and from a person’s experience in the world. There are six schools of philosophy and the major philosophies of education are derived from these schools.

Perennialism is a philosophy that is used to teach whatever truth that already exists. This focuses on the things that have lasted for longer times. Rhalmi (2018), states that essentialism philosophy should be used to teach the basics. It focuses on the teaching of basic knowledge and developing characters. Training of traditional moral values and knowledge is focused on this philosophy. Progressivism philosophy focuses on progress. This philosophy does not focus on the traditional values but progressivists believe in change and moving forward. Students are evaluated by the progress they make in solving problems. Social Reconstructionism focuses on social changes. Students are empowered to focus on social issues such as poverty, discrimination, and environmental issues.  This philosophy aims to create a better living society. Existentialism also referred to as critical theory is a philosophy that focuses on a person and the capability of them to determine what they want. This philosophy perceives learners as active people who can change society.

Out of the five philosophies, I will be using progressivism for my students. This is because everything is changing in our day to day lives. I want my students to know the changes that are happening in our world and how to cope with them. According to Rhalmi (2018), progressivism will help my students learn about the new technologies and the impacts they have on society. This will help them to keep up with the new trends and not feel out of place. This will differentiate them from students using perennialism and essentialism who will not know what exists in the changing world. I believe in change and how it makes things different and exciting. I will help my students to explore the progress in society and the country as a whole. We will use experiments, interviews, and projects to get results and discover how to solve problems. Each student will be required to come up with new ideas, imaginations, and thoughts in my class. My role as a teacher will be to make sure that my students can understand the importance of change and can put into practice whatever they learn. Contrary to social reconstruction that only focuses so much on society, my students will have the advantage of learning about the economic, social, technology and science developments. We will conduct surveys to ensure we have the correct information about these developments.

Conclusion

Education philosophies are used to enlighten and shape students. Some of the philosophies change with the change of generations and technologies but some remain the same. My take will be students to be taught according to the changes being experienced so that they can learn how to adjust accordingly.

 

 

References

 Rhalmi M. (2018). Philosophy of education and teaching: www.myenglishpages.com

580 Words  2 Pages

 

 The structural-functional approach

            The structural-functional approach can also be regarded as the sociological theory. This approach explains why society functions the way it does by putting emphasis on the relationships that exist between the various social institutions that make up the society (Miller, 2003). These institutions are; the government, law, education and religion.  The concepts of “mechanical solidarity and “Organic Solidarity” are the concepts of solidarity as developed by Emile Durkheim.  These two terms were introduced by Durkheim as part of his theory of societies, in the division of labor in societies. A Society can only exhibit mechanical solidarity only if the cohesion and integration of the people is as a result of the homogeneity of the individuals.  People are more connected to each other through similar works, educational and religious training. Mechanical solidarity operates in a small society. Organic Solidarity us as a result of the interdependence that arise from specialization of work.  Organic solidarity can only be built in modern, industrialized societies (Barnes, 1977). Durkheim supports the Organic solidarity where a society is based on the shared practices and norms.  The society is more than the people who live in it. Durkheim’s ideas are the basis of the functionalism theory. Social cohesion can only exist in a society where individuals are equal and share the same norms and values.

Parson’s analysis of social systems begins with a theory of individual actions. Social actors according to him are defined by their identities and action. The goal of the actions of an individual is always to maximize their satisfaction. According to Parson’s the only way to resolve the conflict that exist between individual desires is by characterizing the common value system that preceded the constraints of the social actor (Bicchieri, & Muldoon, 2011). This way the conflicting desire of social actors will not lead to inequality. Manifest functions can be defined as conscious, deliberate and beneficial while latent functions are defined as unconscious, unintended and beneficial. Dysfunctional can either be latent or manifest, they often have a negative effect on the society (Helm, 1971).  The negative impact gives rise to inequality. Social inequality refers to the way society fulfills the needs of its members through ranks of people in a hierarchy.   A cohesive society is one that works towards the wellbeing of its members, a society that fights marginalization of its members which ultimately results in inequality.  A cohesive society promotes trust on equal levels and creates a strong sense of belonging since the society is not built on hierarchy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Barnes, G. M. (1977). Emile Durkheim's Contribution to the Sociology of Education. The Journal           of Educational Thought (JET)/Revue de la Pensée Educative, 213-223.

Bicchieri, C., & Muldoon, R. (2011). Social norms.

Miller, S. (2003). Social institutions. In Realism in Action (pp. 233-249). Springer, Dordrecht.

Helm, P. (1971). Manifest and latent functions. The Philosophical Quarterly (1950-), 21(82), 51-60.

 

 

478 Words  1 Pages

Class conflict

 According to Marxist, world politics explore global problems and all these problems are contributed by the global capitalist system (Baylis et al. 2011, p, 130).  In address these issues, world politics focuses on global capitalism, which has created inequality and hence global poverty.  The world politics address various issues such as human rights, war, global poverty, political environment, class conflict, among other issues.  Marx argues that among the many issues that world politics addresses, the conflict between classes is the main factor.  The world politics consider the class conflict as the main factor because the world is under the capitalist system that values and benefits the powerful and wealthy, and ignores the poor (Baylis et al. 2011, p, 132).  It is important to note that the issue of conflict is rooted in the economy of a society.  According to Marxist, the capitalist class owns the means of production and the ownership affects the relations of production or the social relationships between the capitalists and the workers do not exist.  The capitalist have new productive capacity and therefore workers become the source of profit (Baylis et al. 2011, p, 134).  Note that the capitalist has the material and equipment needed for production and the only thing they require is labor power (workers) to do all the work and earn little.  Both classes (the class of laborers and the capitalists) have conflicting ideas, which lead to the class struggle in the capitalist society.  There are no economic relations and therefore economic has caused social change in that capitalists dominate the society (Baylis et al. 2011, p, 134).  In a capitalist economy, capitalists have the power to control not only the economy but also the legal and political institution.  The class struggle occurs because of exploitative relationship where the poor continue to be poor while the capitalists continue to exploit the workers.

 Today, class conflict (conflict between capitalists and laboring class) is still relevant since the capitalist world system exist and it is at the ‘end phase'.  Note that during the period of the cold war, liberal politics supported democracy but rather than creating democracy, the cold war led to free-market capitalism, which allowed the communist parties to own the means of production, and created a profit-based economy (Baylis et al. 2011, p, 140).  Today, the world system is dominated by economic interest and the capitalists have power to control the economic and political structures.  Another thing that shows the class struggle is still relevant is feminist writings.  The authors assert that today, women are treated as the provider of labor.  Capitalism has created a sexual division where women are used as cheap labor and are unpaid.

             Delaney (2015, p, 38) argues that that class struggle between the bourgeoisie and proletariat is still relevant today in that major corporations are profit-oriented  and the ends results are inequality and exploitation of workers. Even though the main aim of the corporation is to make profit, modern corporations own means of production, and what they only require is time and low-wage labor (Delaney, 2015, p, 38).  In the US, the low-wage labor is growing dramatically and the individual capitalists do not provide job security and other benefits.  They focus on maximizing profits while exploiting and alienating workers. Therefore, it is worth saying that today, the class struggle exists because of the economy, and it has contributed to other social issues such as social stratification (Delaney, 2015, p, 39).  Even though other authors such as Max Weber argue that social issues are contributed by other factors such as political factors, it is worth to note that economy factors are the root cause.  They contribute to all other social issues in that workers live in an oppressive environment where they experience inequality on health, education, and other resources due to exploitation and lack of power to access resources (Delaney, 2015, p, 39). However, Marx argues that the workers can support the communist ideology and increase their power to end class inequality and exploitation of labor.  

 The conflict theory or the class struggle is present in today’s culture since capitalists’ society still exists (ZWEIG, 2004, p, 61).  First, it is important to focus on the modern global economy especially in capitalism countries.  Second, it is important to focus on globalization, which has allowed the capitalists countries to expand their economic power.  Thus, the globalization and capitalist countries help understand that the capitalist elite have more economic freedom and they have the power to spread its power across borders and benefit from trade (ZWEIG, 2004, p, 61).  Globalizations and capitalism also shed light that all workers everywhere are exploited and used as cheap labor.  Note that in globalization, the capitalist's countries do not have a economic ideology but they are driven by a political ideology which allows them to create a class division.  For example, the U.S   is considered as the superpower in global capitalism and this means that the class struggle between capitalists and workers and between rich and poor nations is not only driven by economic ideology but there are some political aspects (ZWEIG, 2004, p, 61).  In trying to address the issue of class struggle, the fundamentalist religious groups express their grievances toward the injustices and sufferings but the U.S response to the grievances has been the use of military power across the globe to maintain its empire as well as its economy.  

 

 

 

 

References

Baylis John., Smith Steve., & Owens Patricia.  (2011). The Globalization of World Politics: An

Introduction to International Relations. OUP Oxford

 

Delaney Tim. (2015). Connecting Sociology to Our Lives: An Introduction to Sociology.

Routledge

 

ZWEIG, M. (2004). What's class got to do with it?: American society in the twenty-first century.

Ithaca, N.Y., ILR Press.

 

955 Words  3 Pages

 Whether class conflict is still relevant today

 

 Class conflict

According to Marxist, world politics explore global problems and all these problems are contributed by the global capitalist system (Baylis et al. 2011, p, 130). In address these issues, world politics focuses on global capitalism, which has created inequality and hence global poverty. The world politics address various issues such as human rights, war, global poverty, political environment, class conflict, among other issues. Marx argues that among the many issues that world politics addresses, the conflict between classes is the main factor. The world politics consider the class conflict as the main factor because the world is under the capitalist system that values and benefits the powerful and wealthy, and ignores the poor (Baylis et al. 2011, p, 132). It is important to note that the issue of conflict is rooted in the economy of a society. According to Marxist, the capitalist class owns the means of production and the ownership affects the relations of production or the social relationships between the capitalists and the workers do not exist. The capitalist have new productive capacity and therefore workers become the source of profit (Baylis et al. 2011, p, 134). Note that the capitalist has the material and equipment needed for production and the only thing they require is labor power (workers) to do all the work and earn little.  Both classes (the class of laborers and the capitalists) have conflicting ideas, which lead to the class struggle in the capitalist society. There are no economic relations and therefore economic has caused social change in that capitalists dominate the society (Baylis et al. 2011, p, 134). In a capitalist economy, capitalists have the power to control not only the economy but also the legal and political institution. The class struggle occurs because of exploitative relationship where the poor continue to be poor while the capitalists continue to exploit the workers.

 Today, class conflict (conflict between capitalists and laboring class) is still relevant since the capitalist world system exist and it is at the ‘end phase'. Note that during the period of the cold war, liberal politics supported democracy but rather than creating democracy, the cold war led to free-market capitalism, which allowed the communist parties to own the means of production, and created a profit-based economy (Baylis et al. 2011, p, 140).  Today, the world system is dominated by economic interest and the capitalists have power to control the economic and political structures. Another thing that shows the class struggle is still relevant is feminist writings. The authors assert that today, women are treated as the provider of labor. Capitalism has created a sexual division where women are used as cheap labor and are unpaid.

             Delaney (2015, p, 38) argues that that class struggle between the bourgeoisie and proletariat is still relevant today in that major corporations are profit-oriented and the ends results are inequality and exploitation of workers. Even though the main aim of the corporation is to make profit, modern corporations own means of production, and what they only require is time and low-wage labor (Delaney, 2015, p, 38). In the US, the low-wage labor is growing dramatically and the individual capitalists do not provide job security and other benefits. They focus on maximizing profits while exploiting and alienating workers. Therefore, it is worth saying that today, the class struggle exists because of the economy, and it has contributed to other social issues such as social stratification (Delaney, 2015, p, 39). Even though other authors such as Max Weber argue that social issues are contributed by other factors such as political factors, it is worth to note that economy factors are the root cause. They contribute to all other social issues in that workers live in an oppressive environment where they experience inequality on health, education, and other resources due to exploitation and lack of power to access resources (Delaney, 2015, p, 39). However, Marx argues that the workers can support the communist ideology and increase their power to end class inequality and exploitation of labor.  

 The conflict theory or the class struggle is present in today’s culture since capitalists’ society still exists (ZWEIG, 2004, p, 61). First, it is important to focus on the modern global economy especially in capitalism countries. Second, it is important to focus on globalization, which has allowed the capitalists countries to expand their economic power. Thus, the globalization and capitalist countries help understand that the capitalist elite have more economic freedom and they have the power to spread its power across borders and benefit from trade (Zweig, 2004, p, 61).  Globalizations and capitalism also shed light that all workers everywhere are exploited and used as cheap labor.  Note that in globalization, the capitalist's countries do not have an economic ideology but they are driven by a political ideology which allows them to create a class division. For example, the U.S is considered as the superpower in global capitalism and this means that the class struggle between capitalists and workers and between rich and poor nations is not only driven by economic ideology but there are some political aspects (Zweig, 2004, p, 61). In trying to address the issue of class struggle, the fundamentalist religious groups express their grievances toward the injustices and sufferings but the U.S response to the grievances has been the use of military power across the globe to maintain its empire as well as its economy.  

  Sklair (2000, p.1) asserts that globalization has created the transnational capitalist class which means that some countries have strong power and dominant class structures.  Corporations in these countries have globalized in terms of foreign investment, offering best practices, and improving the standard of living in societies (Sklair, 2000, p.1).  These corporations, which come from the transnational capitalist class, have increased class struggle by having workplace control, economic control, political control, and culture-ideology control.  The transnational capitalist class has powerful weapons that allow it to compete and sustain growth.

 According to the theory of realism, powerful states in the international affairs struggle for power.  Since the Cold War, powerful states such as the U.S and the Soviet Union have struggled for power for a long time and international affairs do not have a central authority to control the rivalry (Walt, 1998, p. 31).  Thus, each state struggles to maintain survival and this means that weaker states do not have the power to conquer.  On the other hand, power states have the power to protect themselves by forming alliances and using defensive military postures (Walt, 1998, p.32).  Thus, class struggle is still relevant in that powerful states have power and security to maintain their predominant position as well as the political, economic, and social welfare whereas weaker states will continue to suffer from class conflict.

            Cox (1983, p. 165) add that powerful states have global superpower or hegemony over the other states.  It is important to note that hegemony or power in states such as the U.S is continuing and the international order is characterized by hegemony, and dominance.  Great nations have the power to regulate the economy and material resources since they are the main actors.  Factors that influence power include military capability, political, economic, and social power.

 It is also important to note that the developmental state or states that have strong intervention support free-market capitalism.  They are influenced by their self-regulating capacity, they have the means of production and hence they have exploitative power and they are influenced by hegemonic ideology, and they have authoritarian character and competing interest (Radice, H., 2008, p. 1155). These capabilities have created two classes (the capitalists, and the proletarians).  Note that powerful countries do not have the power to regulate the economy but they have capital that allows expressing their economic interest (Milanovi, 2011, p. 126).  On the other hand, the proletarians have labor power, the power is exploited, and the income id unequally distributed.

 

 

 

 

 

References

 

Cox, R.W., 1983. Gramsci, hegemony and international relations: an essay in

method. Millennium12(2), pp.162-175.

 

Baylis, J., Smith, S., & Owens, P. 2011. The Globalization of World Politics: An

Introduction to International Relations. OUP Oxford

 

Delaney, T. 2015. Connecting Sociology to Our Lives: An Introduction to Sociology. New            York: Routledge

 

 

Milanovic, B., 2011. Global inequality: from class to location, from proletarians to migrants.

The World Bank.

 

Radice, H., 2008. The developmental state under global neoliberalism. Third World

Quarterly29(6), pp.1153-1174.

 

Sklair, L., 2000. The transnational capitalist class and the discourse of globalisation. Cambridge

Review of International Affairs14(1), pp.67-85.

 

 

Walt S.M., 1998. International Relations: one world, Many Theories. Foreign Policy, pp. 29-46.

 

Zweig, M. 2004. What's class got to do with it?: American society in the twenty-first century.

Ithaca, N.Y., ILR Press.

 

1463 Words  5 Pages

 

Logical Reasoning

            In logical reasoning, two factors come into place when an individual thinks about it, which include deductive and inductive reasoning. They indicate a way through which an individual establishes a conclusion together with how they consider their deduction to be valid. This paper will discuss the two as well as explain fallacious reasoning.

Deductive reasoning

Deductive reasoning requires a person to have an initial few general ideas which are referred to as the premises and employ them in a particular circumstance. In this, previously acknowledged rules, theories, laws, and other recognizable truths are utilized to provide proof that a specific inference is factual. Furthermore, the notion of deductive reasoning can be explained visually by the use of a funnel that reduces an overall impression into a specific outcome (Vaughn 47). Besides, a syllogism is the simplest form for deductive reasoning, in which two premises that give out a particular view support a conclusion. In syllogism, if X=Y and Z=X, then Y=Z. An example in practice is that; all organs have blood vessels, and all humans have organs, then all human beings have blood vessels. However, it is essential to consider the fact that deductive reasoning aims to show that the result is entirely correct, depending on the sense of the premises (Vaughn 53). Therefore, it does not justify the conclusion. For example; all musical instruments make a sound; cars make a sound; therefore, cars are musical instruments. In the statement, the two premises are right, but the conclusion is false because cars and instruments can be separate entities but at the same time, have similar characteristics. It is possible to imagine them as things that make a sound. Although deductive arguments do not take the exact syllogism, it can apply the same thought processes to make evaluations of their strength and develop counterarguments.

Inductive Reasoning

            Inductive reasoning makes use of a particular series of observations to reach a specific conclusion. It this, a small set of certain premises develop a pattern that is likely to form a broader indication that is likely to be considered as correct. It can be shown in a pyramid-like that begins with a small premise and then broadens into a more comprehensive conclusion. Besides, there is no formal format for this type of reasoning as it is in the deductive. However, all forms are based on realizing a deduction that has a high possibility to fit the premises, and it is utilized when creating generalizations, creating projections, and analysis of causability (Vaughn 54). Inductive reasoning, in theory, starts from specific observations to a broad conclusion. An example of inductive reasoning in practice is; in the first visit to Kaiser Store on a Friday, the workers were wearing blue t-shirts, on another appointment on Friday, they were wearing the same shirts; therefore, all Kaiser Workers wear blue t-shirts of Fridays. Similar to the deductive reasoning, the conclusions cannot be justified, but they are intended to give a predictive deduction. Although they do not provide a sure solution for their premises, they attempt to offer an outcome that is more likely based on the premises (Vaughn 57). This is because several factors have not been considered, for example, in the case of Kaiser Workers, the reasons why they were the t-shirts on Fridays were not sought; therefore, the conclusion cannot be justified. The strength and weaknesses of an inductive conclusion are based on whether the is probable, with consideration on the premises supplied. However, it must also be considered that similar to deductive reasoning, a strong argument is not always valid.

Fallacious Reasoning

            Fallacious reasoning is one that is considered to be an invalid or fault strategy to construct an argument. It can be deceptive though it appears to be better than what it is. Often, fallacies are committed either intentionally to persuade by deception, but others are intentional and occurs as a result of ignorance or carelessness (Vaughn 68). Fallacies can be formal or informal. The later is common in television and newspapers. Because of their nature, it is beneficial to understand well to be able to have the ability to give strong arguments. However, evaluation of whether an argument is fallacious or not is difficult because arguments exist as a continuation of soundness, and besides, it might have different sections that are sound and others which are fallacious. Furthermore, informal fallacious can exploit the psychological, intellectual, and emotional weaknesses of the audience, which thus increase its chances for deception. One type of fallacy is the straw man, which indicates that an individual holds a view that is not actually what the other person believes in (Vaughn 73). Therefore, it is like an unclear version of what the person believes such that the actual statement is not attacked bur the vague version of it, for example, a biology teacher stating in a class that all things evolved and his/her student says he cannot believe human being came from bugs.

Conclusion

            Conclusively, logical reasoning is made up of inductive and deductive types. They are the most common, yet they form absolutely the opposite of the other. However, it should be noted that all the conclusions made by both cannot be justified based on the supplied premises. Fallacy, on the other hand, is a belief that is based on erroneous reasoning.

Work cited

Vaughn, Lewis. Philosophy Here and Now: Powerful Ideas in Everyday Life. Oxford Oxford University Press, 2018.

903 Words  3 Pages

 

Understanding the Concept of Moral Law

It is over fifty years since Martin Luther King died. His memory as a transformational leader has been carried through generation after generation through movies, text books and television shows. King can not only be described as a compelling speaker but also a philosophical intellectual that was able to help the society understand the importance of equality and diversity. King stood for what he believed was rights and he introduced the concept of protest as a defence mechanism against injustice. King is a leader who is remembered throughout the world as an agent of change as he helped bring to light the issue of racism in America. It is through his protests that policies were changed and transformed to help include the minorities in decision making processes such as voting Martin Luther King may be gone, but he is still the most quoted leader in the history of America. King was a moral leader, a leader who fought to ensure that the minority were give equal rights.

The justice of an action is important and determining its accuracy in regard on whether it is moral or just a human made based law is very important. Kant arguments on human morality illustrates that as long as human decisions and actions are good to them and to others, then they are moral (Klaudat, 2019). Kant further argues that good in morality is a moral virtue that goes hand in hand with human happiness. Kant basically argues that for one to be happy, he or she must be virtuously moral, though there are moments when one’s morals virtues may not lead to his or her happiness (Klaudat, 2019).

The arguments by Kant on human morality greatly help to support the actions of Martin Luther King and his speech ‘I have a dream’. King in his letter criticizes injustice in the world and goes ahead to criticize the constitution arguing that it is not fairly structured.  In his speech King says “When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note that all men would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” (King, 2017). In this quote, King tries to illustrate that the creators of the constitution lied to the people, by inciting them with sweet words making the constitution to look perfect and they have not fulfilled their promises making them the immoral ones.

The leaders that helped come up with the constitution were not concerned about the people when they created it, but rather on their own selfish needs and this in relation to Kant’s views are immoral individuals. King believed that a moral leader is one that leads by example and one who is willing to commit to his promises and also sacrifice for the good of his people (Wolfson, 2003). King in his speech criticizes the constitution, which was created with the view that everyone would be given equal opportunities. King speaks against racism, where the black people are not given equal treatment with the white people. King supports law-breaking when the law is not fair for everyone. King considers the law to be unfair and illustrates that it is not democratically structured if the minorities are not given a chance to vote or even voice their views.

In respect to Kant’s argument on human morality, the actions by King were morally upright. King was trying to fight for the rights of the minority by speaking his mind on the issues he thought the government was unfair about. King in his speech and letters does not in any way disrespect any person or break any laws. King aired his thoughts through peaceful protests; the only crime that he committed was trying to educate his people about their rights as U.S citizens. King was selfless in his protest against the unfair constitution, his main interest was just to try and ensure that the rights of the minority were looked into (Wolfson, 2003). But in respect to Kant’s views, King cannot be really condemned to be immoral because his actions were for the good of others.

 According to Kant, the consequences of a country cannot be used to define the personality of an individual and define whether a person is upright or wicked (Klaudat, 2019). What should be used to review whether an individual is upright or wicked is the motivation behind his actions. In the case of King, he committed the immoral acts because he was determined to have equal rights for everyone in America. King was willing to stand by his believes and he was willing to sacrifice himself to ensure that the minority were given equal rights, which makes him deserving moral leader.  A leader who was moved by the needs of the people and he fought to ensure that his believes and dreams were fulfilled. He helped change the mind-set of the American society, helped them see the animosity in the unfair policies against the minority.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Klaudat, A. (2019). Prudence, Happiness and Wisdom in Kant’s Moral Philosophy: the case

in the Groundwork. Studia Kantiana, 17(1), 85–99. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=138784624&site=ehost-live

King, J. . M. L. (2017). I Have a Dream Speech. I Have a Dream (Primary SourDocument),

1–3. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=21213403&site=ehost-live

Wolfson, A. (2003). The Martin Luther King we remember. Public Interest, (152), 39.

Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=10044946&site=ehost-live

914 Words  3 Pages

Trait Approach

The trait approach as an explanation of leadership in general 

 According to Germain, (2012) the trait approach to leadership focus on personal characteristics. It does not focus on sets of hypothesis, but its emphasis on the leader himself and his personality. The article asserts that the traits approach to leadership is associated with expertise. In other words, leaders who use traits such as self-confidence and social skills are experts. Some researchers and multiple studies have confirmed that experts are people who combine evidence-based characteristics and self-enhancement characteristics (Germain, 2012). The former means experts have knowledge, skills, training, decision strategies, and more. The latter means that experts have self-confidence, self-assurance, honesty and integrity, competency traits, ambition, and more.  The characteristics that create a connection between experts and leaders are; both have the intellectual ability, self-confidence, determination, and sociability (Germain, 2012).The article also states that leaders who use the trait approach are charismatic. Charisma is an exceptional talent, and a great style of leadership in that charismatic leaders take the risk, identify followers' needs, increase their competence and subordinate competence, they are energetic,  self-confident, and exemplary (Germain, 2012) Therefore, the trait approach allows leaders to do extraordinary things. Note that leaders who use the trait approach apply different traits and expertise, which can lead to performance improvement in different areas.

 Chen (2016) introduces a fundamental idea that personality traits motivate leaders to lead. Note that motivation to lead is influenced by an individual's natural tendency and a sense of duty. For example, the positive components of narcissistic personality traits such as self-esteem and self-sufficiency increase the positivity of self and motivate the leaders to lead. Since narcissists focus on achieving a higher positivity of the self, they will naturally lead to improve their positive esteem and achieve social approval. In addition, leaders with humility trait will use their strength and avoid self-contempt. In the leadership role, they will exhibit self-confidence and embrace leadership with identification (Chen, 2016). In general, leaders with humility character will be motivated to lead since they have to lead. They will always be humble, appreciative, empathetic, sincerely, honesty, and create a culture of fairness.

 

The trait approach to leadership within the criminal justice system

            Current empirical assessments have confirmed that leaders are not only using traditional styles such as autocratic, but they are also employing other sets of styles which are non-traditional. However, the policing scholarship has not employed the empirical knowledge to leadership, and thus, leadership in policing is understood through applying general theories of leadership. It is important to understand that the general theory of leadership put emphasis on traditional leadership styles, and they are associated with inconsistent findings due to lack of methodological designs. This means that traditional studies do not pay attention to the leader's behavior and development (Schafer, 2010). Most corporate leadership literatures are employing trait-based thinking. However, the policing focus on supervisory styles and pay less attention to individual traits and habits. The author asserts that leadership is poor in policing in that policing scholars support formal leadership and ignore the subjective elements in leaders' behaviors (Schafer, 2010). The criminal justice system uses a supervisory style, which is designed to influence subordinates. The big problem is that in American policing, there is no leadership development.  Even though the department demand for police learning and development, it remains unclear on how leadership can be developed. In general, there is no leadership effectiveness since the department does evaluate effective and ineffective leaders using the consensus model, which focus on goals accomplishment (Schafer, 2010). However, the author asserts that to achieve effective leadership, the policing department should use the objective perspective, which states that for leaders to achieve organizational objectives, they must apply their natural ability. Note that the present research does mean that leaders should apply their own characteristics on leadership, but it focuses on using leadership experiences to yield favorable outcomes (Schafer, 2010). In the criminal justice system, supervisors are taught to use classroom learning, field training, procedural competence, technical competency, and follow procedures. These elements tend to improve the technical knowledge and skills so that police can perform duties effectively.  However, the elements will not help police develop integrity, fairness, and ethics (Schafer, 2010). There are not taught to consider their interpersonal dynamics and behavioral aspect, which contributes to effective leadership. 

 

 

 

 

References

 

Chen, L. (2016). Linking leader personality traits to motivation to lead: A self-concept

approach. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal44(11), 1913-1925.

 

Germain, M. L. (2012). Traits and skills theories as the nexus between leadership and expertise:

Reality or fallacy?. Performance Improvement51(5), 32-39.

 

Schafer, J. A. (2010). Effective leaders and leadership in policing: traits, assessment,

development, and expansion. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies &

Management33(4), 644-663.

 

 

 

794 Words  2 Pages

Philosophy

Olbermann is against the proposed Muslim Community Center, and he argues that the community center should not be built near the Ground Zero. He concludes that a country of freedom has been transformed into the ground for terrorists. The second reason is that a mosque is a place of worship and a holy place. However,  the community center will involve all sorts of activities including; swimming pool, bookstore, food court, restaurant, culinary schools, theater, and of course the mosque (NewsPoliticsInfo, 2010).The third reason is that since the community center will be a training center for terrorists, people will fear Muslims, and Muslim will fear the Americans.

Condell is against the Ground Zero Mosque, and he concludes that allowing a religion that murdered 3, 000 innocent people to build a mosque is an inoffensive act. In other words, it is unwise, divisive, disrespectful, arrogant, and insensitive (Condell, 2010). Building the mosque in this location will remind the family members who lost their loved ones the terrible events of 9/ 11. The second argument is that the construction requires $ 100 million, and this means a lot of money will be spent. The third reason is that the mosque should be built in another place to avoid conflict. Note that ‘the Ground Zero' place is very sensitive, and thus, the United Nations should look for a better place.

 According to the criteria for rational acceptability, Condell has a strong argument. What makes his argument stronger is strong inferences (Seay & Nuccetelli, 2012).For example, he gives a basis of evidence that Islamization of Europe will also happen in America if the Islamic center is built.  In other words, he uses a reason to support his conclusion. Second, Condell's argument has acceptability. This means that a rational adult can use his or her own personal experience to accept the premise. For example, from personal experience or observation, one can agree that the doctrine of jihad influenced the insane act. In addition, one can agree that Islamic religion is a threat to the world peace and for this reason, Islam should be not allowed to build mosque since the reason behind the construction of a permanent mosque is to conquer America. Third, Condell provides sufficient reasons to show that the argument is good enough (Seay & Nuccetelli, 2012). Condell also ensures relevance by providing relevant premises. For example, he says that America is big and Islam can construct their offense mosque in other places like the Death Valley.

Olbermann could have improved his argument by giving sufficient reasons. Note that he is throwing in arguments without supporting his claims. For example, he talks about religious freedom and defends Islam by saying that Muslims are victims of violence. However, he does not show conclusive evidence to show how Muslims are innocent and the motive behind building a mosque. He lacks supporting reasons and supportive, relevant materials (Seay & Nuccetelli, 2012).  During the arbitration, I would encourage both parties to agree to disagree with the arguments given and maintain relationships rather than relying on the disagreements.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reference

Seay, G., & Nuccetelli, S. (2012). How to think logically. Vancouver, B.C: Langara College.

 

NewsPoliticsInfo. (2010). Keith Olbermann's Special Comment on the NYC Islamic Center. Retrieved from:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2kEXPzAn6o

 

Condell Pat. (2010). No Mosque At Ground Zero. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjS0Novt3X4

 

 

 

557 Words  2 Pages

 

A Challenge Associated with Realising the Common Good

 

Introduction

The theological meaning of common good that has been given by the Catholic Roman Church is; Common good is the amount of social conditions that allow people to work in groups or as individuals with an aim of reaching their fulfilment fully and easily. For them to align their actions to the theological definition of common good they struggle a lot in order to balance their work while still trying to achieve both social and personal integrity. Nurses have an extra task in addition to the role of making sure they maintain and uphold ethical standards when handling the patients under their care. The road of realising aspirations of the common good in nursing is not always smooth and a few challenges occur locally and globally.

Nurses are at the forefront of offering healthcare in the society but society has refused to accept the idea of health care as a common good and this has become a challenge that has hindered the realising aspirations of the common good in the nursing profession both globally and locally (Valasquez et al., 2017). Claims such as healthcare offered to individuals is different from one person to another is one of the reasons that make makes society doubt that healthcare is a public good as compared to other public goods such as national defence.  In healthcare members of society and healthcare providers are in exchange of private goods and their personal choice and judgment play an important role in ensuring the members of the society access these goods. There is some truth in this claim since nurses use the necessary healthcare resources to cure or care for these individuals (Cochran, Clarke, 1999). The point is healthcare offered by the nursing community is not only a common good but a means to common good.

Societies have failed to recognize that the nursing profession is in existence because of common good in conjunction with societal good. This failure has made them subject the existence of the nursing community to oblivion (Cochran, 2017). The nursing profession is defined by element such as concern, responsibility and care, these important and essential elements of this profession are at the verge of extinction and if the society is not careful these elements are likely to be replaced by machines that are managed by technicians due to the influence and grip of technology. The proposed scenario will only take place if the nursing community will fail to show and remind society of its importance and the only way it can do this is by ensuring they work towards the common good (Donley, Grandjean, Jairath, & McMullen, 2006).

It has been a challenge when it comes to deciding whether common good should be considered when it comes to analysing the role that the nursing community plays in our societies. Common good helps in shaping the guidelines of practicing nursing (Cochran, Hume, & Bouchard, 2016). Common good has played an important role and has influenced the advancements that are taking place in the offering of public health services such as widespread immunization and the constant care that is being showed to the elderly by the nursing community.

Evidence based practice has been a challenge that has faced the nursing community for a long time now not only on a local level but on a global level.  Nursing profession requires a concrete base of proof in order to make sense of any nursing action or intervention that is taken by a nurse (Baalen & Jansen, 2015). In this context also nurses are required to show evidence of their knowledge and this knowledge is checked from examinations of the clinical results of the nurse in question or the evidence is backed up by previous research that had been carried out.  When the evidence presented fails to be in accordance to the nursing action then the nursing profession is treated as one with uncertain value (Meux, 2013).

Conclusion

The road of realizing the common good in the nursing profession and community has not been an easy one. Nurses are at the forefront of offering healthcare but society has refused to embrace the fact that the healthcare offered by nurses is common good and the fact that nursing is an evidence-based practice has presented a challenge both locally and globally.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Baalen van M. & Jansen V.A. (2015). “Dangerous Liaisons: The Ecology of Private Interest and Common Good,” Oikos, vol. 95, no. 2, November 2015, pp. 211-224;

Cochran A, Hume J, & Bouchard C. (2016).  “Catholic Healthcare and the Common         Good,” Health Progress, May-June 2016, pp. 34-40; Hamel R., “Of What Good Is the        Common Good?” Health Progress, May-June 2016, pp. 45-47.

Cochran C. (2017). The Common Good and Healthcare Policy,” Health Progress, May-June      2017, pp. 41-44, 47.

Cochran, Clarke E. (May-June 1999). The Common Good and Healthcare Policy, Journal of the Catholic Health Association of the United States

Donley, S. R., Grandjean, C., Jairath, N., & McMullen, P. (November-December 2006).Nursing and the Common Good

Meux E. P. (2013). “Concern for the Common Good in an N-Person Game,” Journal of    Personality & Social Psychology, vol. 28, no. 3, December 2013, pp. 414-418.

Velasquez M. et al. (2017). “The Common Good,” Markula Center for Applied Ethics, available             at www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/commongood.html; “Common Good:   Restoring Common Sense to American Law.”

 

 

 

899 Words  3 Pages

Get in Touch

If you have any questions or suggestions, please feel free to inform us and we will gladly take care of it.

Email us at support@edudorm.com Discounts

TODAY'S SPECIAL

GET -30% OFF!

x

LOGIN

  Working. Please Wait...