The Jilting of Granny Weatherall Essay Example

The Jilting of Granny Weatherall Paper In the short story â€Å"The Jilting of Granny Weatherall,† Granny Weatherall’s stubbornness is reflected in the way she views people’s actions and in her obviously senile thinking process. Whether consciously or subconsciously, she regards most of the attempts to aid her or please her as either threatening or rude. This is derived from her stubborn attitude towards death and illness. She views herself as being near immortal until the very end. Her first misconception of someone trying to help her is shown in the very beginning of the story. When the doctor tries to check her pulse and give her a routine check-up, Granny Weatherall â€Å"flicked her wrist out of Doctor Harry’s†¦ fingers. † This is followed by her considering him to be a â€Å"brat† who needs to â€Å"respect [his] elders. † The doctor then tells her not to get out of bed. She responds by telling him to â€Å"get along and doctor your sick†¦ Leave a well woman alone. † This reaction to the doctor’s check-up show’s that Granny is very confident that nothing is wrong with her. Whether this is her senile mind taking over or if she really believes that she is fine, there is some part of her that doesn’t want to let go of life. We will write a custom essay sample on The Jilting of Granny Weatherall specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on The Jilting of Granny Weatherall specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on The Jilting of Granny Weatherall specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer After the doctor walks out, Granny Weatherall hears her daughter, Cornelia, and the doctor whispering outside her door. Cornelia clearly sounds worried about her mother’s fading health, but Granny sees the whispering as being rude. When Cornelia comes into Granny’s room to check on her and see if she needs anything, Granny’s face tied up â€Å"in hard knots† and Granny says â€Å"I want a lot of things. First off, go away and don’t whisper. † Again, a simple act of generosity is viewed by Granny Weatherall as a rude act. Her stubborn attitude in this segment seems to be suggesting that she really believes that she does not need any help with anything. Even when she falls asleep, she hopes â€Å"the children would keep out and let her rest. † During her sleep, â€Å"she found death in her mind and found it clammy and unfamiliar. † Then Granny goes on to think, â€Å"Let [death] take care of itself. † This suggests that Granny likes to push death to the side and think about other things. Even when Granny Weatherall needs help, she finds a way to make others look rude for not knowing she wanted something. Granny asks Cornelia for a â€Å"noggin of hot toddy. Cornelia asks if Granny was cold, and Granny replies, â€Å"I’m chilly†¦ Lying in bed stops my circulation. I must have told you a thousand times. † After this, Granny Weatherall hears Cornelia asking her husband to entertain Granny. She thinks, â€Å"Wait, wait, Cornelia, till your children whisper behind y our back! † Finally, soon after this, Granny feels the effect of death on her. She realizes this and wants to â€Å"stand up to it. † Cornelia brings her to her senses by washing her forehead with cold water. Granny naturally sees this as being rude because she â€Å"[does not] like having her face washed in cold water. A priest comes to give her final rights, but his words break off right before he’s about to explain what’s happening because Granny won’t accept her end. The moment of Granny Weatherall’s death, while Cornelia is crying over her mother, Granny says her final words, â€Å"I’m not going, Cornelia. I’m taken by surprise. I can’t go. † This shows that Granny, truly, consciously and unconsciously, stubbornly denied her weakness and completely forced the thought of death from her mind. Even when she â€Å"accepted† her death, she still couldn’t really accept her death.

Increasing, Decreasing, and Constant Returns to Scale

Increasing, Decreasing, and Constant Returns to Scale The term returns to scale  refers to how well a business or company is producing its products. It tries to pinpoint increased production in relation to factors that contribute to production over a period of time. Most production functions include both labor and capital as factors. How can you tell if a function is increasing returns to scale, decreasing returns to scale, or having no effect on returns to scale? The three definitions below explain what happens when you increase all production inputs by a multiplier. Multipliers For illustrative purposes, well call the multiplier m. Suppose our inputs are capital and labor, and we double each of these (m 2). We want to know if our output will more than double, less than double, or exactly double. This leads to the following definitions: Increasing Returns to Scale: When our inputs are increased by m, our output increases by more than m.Constant Returns to Scale: When our inputs are increased by m, our output increases by exactly m.Decreasing Returns to Scale: When our inputs are increased by m, our output increases by less than m. The multiplier must always be positive and greater than one because our goal is to look at what happens when we increase production. An m of 1.1 indicates that weve increased our inputs by 0.10 or 10 percent. An m of 3 indicates that weve tripled the inputs. Three Examples of Economic Scale Now lets look at a few production functions and see if we have increasing, decreasing, or constant returns to scale. Some textbooks use Q for quantity in the production function, and others use Y for output. These differences dont change the analysis, so use whichever your professor requires. Q 2K 3L: To determine the returns to scale, we will begin by increasing both K and L by m. Then we will create a new production function Q’. We will compare Q’ to Q.Q’ 2(K*m) 3(L*m) 2*K*m 3*L*m m(2*K 3*L) m*QAfter factoring, we can replace (2*K 3*L) with Q, as we were given that from the start. Since Q’ m*Q we note that by increasing all of our inputs by the multiplier m weve increased production by exactly m. As a result, we have constant returns to scale.Q.5KL: Again, we increase both K and L by m and create a new production function. Q’ .5(K*m)*(L*m) .5*K*L*m2 Q * m2Since m 1, then m2 m. Our new production has increased by more than m, so we have increasing returns to scale.QK0.3L0.2: Again, we increase both K and L by m and create a new production function. Q’ (K*m)0.3(L*m)0.2 K0.3L0.2m0.5 Q* m0.5Because m 1, then m0.5 m, our new production has increased by less than m, so we have decreasing returns to scale. Although there are other ways to determine  whether a production function is increasing returns to scale, decreasing returns to scale, or generating constant returns to scale, this way is the fastest and easiest. By using the m multiplier and simple algebra, we can quickly solve economic scale questions. Remember that even though people often think about returns to scale and economies of scale as interchangeable, they are different. Returns to scale only consider production efficiency, while economies of scale explicitly consider cost.

Why To Kill a Mockingbird Is Controversial to Some

Why To Kill a Mockingbird Is Controversial to Some There are several reasons that the content of Harper Lees great novel, To Kill a Mockingbird, is sometimes considered so controversial (and inappropriate for young audiences) that it is banned, challenged, as well as removed from school/library lists and shelves. Racial Injustice The topic of prejudice, discrimination, and out-and-out cruel hatred is not always a topic that we like to discuss with our children. After all, we want children to remain innocent, to be removed and protected from the injustices, unfairness, cruelty, and fear that so often prevails in this world. Children learn all-to-quickly that society is filled with goodness and kindness (or at least thats the hope), but theres also a great deal of evil, bullying and all the worst unkindness in human nature.  To Kill a Mockingbird explores both aspects of humanity. Theres the life-and-death struggle of an innocent black man against the discrimination and barbarity thats not only evident in the actions of their fellow townspeople but also in the pervasive prejudices of the legal system. Atticus is the only man who is brave enough to stand up against the mob-rule, in an effort to ensure that justice is served! He knows that the ignorance that prevails could cost him his life (and/or everything he holds dear), but the pursuit of justice and the defense of innocence is (to him) worth anything he could face. He is not deterred. Sexual Violence Although the lies that are told related to the rape are not explicit in nature, theres still the fact that Mayella Ewell put blame on Tom Robinson for a horrible violation. The indictment is completely fabricated, but even the claim of rape troubles some readers. For some parents, teachers and other gateways to reading, the topic of violation (even in an abstract sense) is unacceptable for school-age children. Physical Violence Its difficult to feel sorry for Mayella because we know what her claims mean to Tom (and to Atticus, as he attempts to defend an innocent man). We may dislike what shes saying (and doing), we come to some acceptance of the psychology of the poor, abused girl; she would do or say anything (in her fearful and browbeaten state). In addition to the abuse that Mayella experiences at the hand of her father, physical violence are brought to bear upon Atticus and his children. In their anger and ignorance, the townspeople attempt to use violence and fear; to control Atticus.Atticus refuses to back down. He refuses to allow an innocent man to falsely convicted and imprisoned, without at least a fight. Atticus says: Courage is not a man with a gun in his hand. Its knowing youre licked before you begin but you begin anyway and you see it through no matter what. You rarely win, but sometimes you do.   Heres another interesting question; how would the novel be different without controversial topics (and events)? Imagine what the book would be like if they sanitized the novel.

General Functions of Management As They Related To Project Management Essay - 9

General Functions of Management As They Related To Project Management - Essay Example The researcher states that the management is involved in the project planning which includes listing all the project activities and tasks including the time taken and the relationships between the tasks. Project management can be defined the discipline which is involved in planning, organizing, leading and controlling resources in the achievement of specific goals. Project management steps include planning, organizing, project initiation, project monitoring and control and the project closure. Project managers are concerned by the project constraints which include people, time and money resource constraints. The general functions of management are applied in the successful management of projects. The management should be involved in the planning phase by establishing project plans of action which are either short term, medium term or long term. Project management also involves organization of the project resources mainly the human resources. Project manager assigns the roles and resp onsibilities to different personnel involved in the project and also delegate the authority. Just like general management, project managers have a leading function whereby they are supposed to motivate, coordinate and communicate with the project employees to ensure the project goals are achieved effectively. Project managers also control the project progress by reviewing and monitoring the project progress against the project plans and taking the necessary corrective action where deviations exist. Some of the main concerns of management include identification of the stakeholder interests and expected outcomes since numerous users of the project have different needs. Another main concern of the management is the project constraints. The main constraints include time, finances and scope hence altering one constrain will impact on the rest. If the project manager reduces the completion time, additional resources will be required to meet the new project schedule.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

PROJECT DESCRIPTION - Essay Example Particularly, I focused on the water conditions, depth, and flow. The experimental research took various routes; however, my first observational study was the water conditions. Apparently, the samples of the water revealed a substantial amount of Algae, which is a type of bacterial substance produced by duck week and sewage residues. Through further research into algae, I found that there is a way of filtering this algae bacterium into a mineral. According to research, this is said to be good for muscular a joint conditions. Having found out this possible, I wanted to talk this further. Therefore, I decided to design a thermal pool whereby I would use the algae as the healing mineral. In the course of enriching the discovery, I will have a three-floor building beside the thermal pool. The ground floor will serve as the changing rooms as well as toilet facilities. The first floor would be the lab area for important experiments and presentation of findings. Subsequently, it will constitute a gallery space where the bacterial findings and different filtration as well as a recycling processes display. Most importantly, this will include the bacterial filtration process for the Algae collected, the sand filtration process which is used to recycle the canal water to the thermal pool and third the recycling process of the used thermal water channelled back into the canal. In essence, the water is pumped from the canal into pipes using a pressure pump, which then pumps to the roof of the building. Conceivably, this is where all the filtration processes take place, opened into a valve, which lets the waterfall down into the pool

Professional Growth Plan Essay Example for Free

Professional Growth Plan Essay Goals: 1. Linking with the school, community while serving as a mediator of culture (TPE 14) 2. Developing as a professional educator (TPE 13). Growth goals and objectives: Â · I will continue to link my classroom with issues affecting the community and promote equality. Â · I will improve my teaching techniques by evaluating, and reflecting on my teaching practices. Â · I will ensure that my class is interesting and that informative. Â · I will develop an effective teacher-student communication in my class. Â · I will ensure that the class is as participatory as possible and that the students are actively involved in the learning process. Procedures and Activities: 1. During Cesar Chavez birth day, I invited a special speaker to my classroom. She has had the opportunity of working with Cesar Chavez for many years. Her name is Micaela Saucedo and as I found out, the experience she has gotten from working with Cesar Chavez was incredible! For one, the students were really interested in her and intrigued by Cesar Chavez personal life. Because of the success of the speech she gave, I have decided that I will continue inviting Michaela to my classroom to deliver more talks. Furthermore, as we know that more than ten-million people live in the U. S without legal documents. Their reasons for migrating to America are complex are they are also different. However, most of us would agree that immigrants risk their lives crossing the border in order to come to the U.S. Generally, they migrate with the hope of creating a better future for themselves and their loved ones back home. Nonetheless, these undocumented people live in constant fear of being arrested, jailed and deported. The question to ask here is why is it this way? The answer maybe obvious for others, but for Micaela Saucedo the answer is a just the nature of the immigration policy. Personally, she is involved in helping migrant workers and recently became the director of Casa Refugio Elvira where they provide shelter to deported children and women. The idea of bringing her to my classroom is to let the students learn how to view the issue from two different points and not just one. Micaela can be contacted at: In addition, Friday May 16, Dolores Huerta will be in ___. I will be attending this special event since she will be talking about a lot of issues affecting our society today. Finally, for my teaching next semester, I will contact ex director of Human Trafficking and Equality to come to our school to give a talk in my classroom about the differences in Human Trafficking and Human Smuggling and the effects it has on our society. As wells as a talk about the issue of discrimination in our school system. By inviting important people to my classroom, I intend to create a social consciousness in my students. I believe that it will also allow them to think critically and understand situations that surround them. 2. Apart from this, I will also improve my teaching methods by video recording my teaching at least twice a semester and later on evaluate and critically reflect on it. I was thinking of video recording my teaching style during the second week of the semester and during the middle of the semester and compare the changes that I have made. The questions I will ask myself include; what was changed? What did not change? Why? After this, I will continue striving at improving it instead of not paying attention to it. I believe teachers should constantly change teaching methods so that students do not get bored with the same teaching style. However, as I figured, video recording myself and reflecting on it may not be sufficient. Consequently, I have ordered The New Teacher Book which is published by Rethinking Schools. From what I understand, this book offers guidance of how to connect well with the students and the community. Also, I will subscribe to Rethinking School magazine so that I am will be informed about ways of improving my teaching techniques and also to be aware of what is happening in the nation with regards to education.

Greek Pride in the Individual :: Ancient Greece Greek History

Greek Pride in the Individual The culture of ancient Greece reflects the importance of the individual in society in many different ways. The Greeks used art, philosophy, and even their system of government to convey their beliefs in the importance of one single man in a society. Greek artists showed value for the individual. All people were portrayed in Greek art, from the sagging old woman to the ideal athlete. Although early Greek art focused on the human ideal, their later art shows that the Greeks appreciated all forms, and found the human body in general to be a beautiful thing. Even the gods in Greek art showed how highly the Greeks valued humanity. The gods were depicted as humans, and were made to human scale; no huge overpowering deity was ever portrayed in their art. The Greeks appreciated themselves in their art as much as they appreciated the gods. Even on the most famous temple of all time, the Parthenon, humans were portrayed. The frieze that adorned the upper face of the Parthenon depicted the human procession in honour of the god Athena. It was not just sculptures and architecture that showed Greek pride in the individual. Greek drama showed a huge appreciation for humans in all their glory. The Greeks valued human emotions; their plays covered a wide array of subjects, all the way from the tragedies of war to the comedic side of a society in the perils of war. These subjects made it possible to reveal the Greek appreciation for real life situations, showing the value they placed on human actions, but most of all on human nature. Like the various forms of Greek art, the government of ancient Greece appreciated the individual by creating an environment in which individuals were free to express themselves. Tyrants like Pisistratus and Cleisthenes came to power to try and make the polis a better place for the individual. These tyrants reformed the state in many ways; they helped make it possible for the rich and poor to have equal rights, and they created the conditions for the construction of the splendid monumental buildings ancient Greece is remembered for today. Although not all tyrants were good, they all had one thing in common: they were all citizens of Greece, and ruled to improve the lifestyle of the citizens of Greece. After the end of tyranny, Greece had a democracy; a government ruled by the people for the people.

Intellectual Standards

Becoming a Fair-Minded Thinker Weak versus Strong Critical Thinking Critical thinking involves basic intellectual skills, but these skills can be used to serve two incompatible ends: self-centeredness or fair-mindedness. As we are learning the basic intellectual skills that critical thinking entails, we can begin to use those skills in a selfish or in a fair-minded way. For example, when students are taught how to recognize mistakes in reasoning (commonly called fallacies), most students see those mistakes principally in the reasoning they already disapprove of rather than in their own reasoning.They develop some proficiency in making their opponent’s thinking look bad. Liberals see mistakes in the arguments of conservatives; conservatives see mistakes in the arguments of liberals. Believers see mistakes in the thinking of nonbelievers; nonbelievers see mistakes in the thinking of believers. Those who oppose abortion readily see mistakes in the arguments for abortion; those wh o favor abortion readily see mistakes in the arguments against it. We call these thinkers weak-sense critical thinkers.We call the thinking â€Å"weak† because, though it is working well for the thinker in some respects, it is missing certain important higher-level skills and values of critical thinking. Most significantly, it fails to consider, in good faith, viewpoints that contradict its own viewpoint. It lacks fair-mindedness. Another traditional name for the weak-sense thinker is found in the word sophist. Sophistry is the art of winning arguments regardless of whether there are obvious problems in the thinking being used.There is a set of lower-level skills of rhetoric, or argumentation, by which one can make poor thinking look good and good thinking look bad. We see this often in unethical lawyers and politicians who are more concerned with winning than with anything else. They use emotionalism and trickery in an intellectually skilled way. Sophistic thinkers succeed o nly if they do not come up against what we call strong-sense critical thinkers. Strong-sense critical thinkers are not easily tricked by slick argumentation.As William Graham Sumner (1906) said almost a century ago, they cannot be stampeded . . . are slow to believe . . can hold things as possible or probable in all degrees, without certainty and without pain . . . can wait for evidence and weigh evidence . . . can resist appeals to their dearest prejudices†¦ Perhaps even more important, strong-sense critical thinkers strive to be fair- minded. They use thinking in an ethically responsible manner. They work to empathize with the viewpoints of others. They are willing to listen to arguments they do not necessarily hold.They change their views when faced with better reasoning. Rather than using their thinking to manipulate others and to hide from the truth (in a weak-sense way), they use thinking in an ethical, reasonable manner. We believe that the world already has too many ski lled selfish thinkers, too many sophists and intellectual con artists, too many unscrupulous lawyers and politicians who specialize in twisting information and evidence to support their selfish interests and the vested interests of those who pay them.We hope that you, the reader, will develop as a highly skilled, fair-minded thinker, one capable of exposing those who are masters at playing intellectual games at the expense of the well-being of innocent people. We hope as well that you develop the intellectual courage to argue publicly against what is unethical in human thinking. We write this book with the assumption that you will take seriously the fair-mindedness implied by strong-sense critical thinking.To think critically in the strong sense requires that we develop fair-mindedness at the same time that we learn basic critical thinking skills, and thus begin to â€Å"practice† fair-mindedness in our thinking. If we do, we avoid using our skills to gain advantage over othe rs. We treat all thinking by the same high standards. We expect good reasoning from those who support us as well as those who oppose us. We subject our own reasoning to the same criteria we apply to reasoning to which we are unsympathetic.We question our own purposes, evidence, conclusions, implications, and point of view with the same vigor as we question those of others. Developing fair-minded thinkers try to see the actual strengths and weaknesses of any reasoning they assess. This is the kind of thinker we hope this book will help you become. So, right from the beginning, we are going to explore the characteristics that are required for the strongest, most fair-minded thinking. As you read through the rest of the book, we hope you will notice how we are attempting to foster â€Å"strong-sense† critical thinking.Indeed, unless we indicate otherwise, every time we now use the words critical thinking, from this point forward, we will mean critical thinking in the strong sens e. In the remainder of this chapter, we will explore the various intellectual â€Å"virtues† that fair-minded thinking requires. There is much more to fair-mindedness than most people realize. Fair-mindedness requires a family of interrelated and interdependent states of mind. One final point: In addition to fair-mindedness, strong-sense critical thinking implies higher-order thinking.As you develop as a thinker and internalize the traits of mind that we shall soon discuss, you will develop a variety of skills and insights that are absent in the weak-sense critical thinker. As we examine how the various traits of mind are conducive to fair-mindedness, we will also look at the manner in which the traits contribute to quality of thought (in general). In addition to the fairness that strong-sense critical thinking implies, depth of thinking and high quality of thinking are also implied.Weak-sense critical thinkers develop a range of intellectual skills (for example, skills of ar gumentation) and may achieve some success in getting what they want, but they do not develop any of the traits that are highlighted in this chapter. For example, some students are able to use their intelligence and thinking skills to get high grades without taking seriously the subjects they are studying. They become masters, if you will, of â€Å"beating the system. † They develop test- taking and note-taking skills. They develop their short-term memory.They learn to appeal to the prejudices of their teachers. They become academic sophists— skilled only when functioning on the surface of things. They may even transfer these abilities to other domains of their lives. But such skill development does not entail those skills that presuppose the traits we shall now examine. [pic] Figure 1. 1 Critical thinkers strive to develop essential traits or characteristics of mind. These are interrelated intellectual habits that enable one to open, discipline, and improve mental func tioning. [pic] Figure 1. 2 These are the opposites of the intellectual virtues.Our natural disposition to develop them is an important reason why new need to develop countervailing traits.. Let us turn to the component traits of the strong-sense critical thinker. After we take up each individual trait as that trait stands in relation to fair-mindedness, we will highlight the significance of the trait as a contributor to the general development of high levels of thinking. What Does Fair-Mindedness Require? First, the basic concept: To be fair-minded is to strive to treat every viewpoint relevant to a situation in an unbiased, unprejudiced way.It entails a consciousness of the fact that we, by nature, tend to prejudge the views of others, placing them into â€Å"favorable† (agrees with us) and â€Å"unfavorable† (disagrees with us) categories. We tend to give less weight to contrary views than to our own. This is especially true when we have selfish reasons for opposing views. If, for example, we can ignore the viewpoint of the millions of people in the world who live in extreme poverty, we can avoid having to give up something to help them.Thus fair-mindedness is especially important when the situation calls on us to consider views that we don’t want to consider. Fair-mindedness entails a consciousness of the need to treat all viewpoints alike, without reference to one’s own feelings or selfish interests, or the feelings or selfish interests of one’s friends, community, or nation. It implies adherence to intellectual standards (such as accuracy and sound logic), uninfluenced by one’s own advantage or the advantage of one’s group. The opposite of fair-mindedness is intellectual unfairness.It is demonstrated by the failure of thinkers to feel any responsibility to treat points of view or ways of thinking significantly different from their own by the same standards that they treat their own. Achieving a truly fair-m inded state of mind is challenging. It requires us to simultaneously become intellectually humble, intellectually courageous, intellectually empathetic, intellectually honest, intellectually perseverant, confident in reason (as a tool of discovery and learning), and intellectually autonomous.Without this family of traits in an integrated constellation, there is no true fair-mindedness. But these traits, singly and in combination, are not commonly discussed in everyday life, and are rarely taught. They are not discussed on television. They are not part of the school curriculum. They are not tested in standardized testing. Your friends will not ask you questions about them. In truth, because they are largely unrecognized, these traits are not commonly valued. Yet each of them is essential in fair-mindedness and for development of critical thinking.Let us see how and why this is so. Intellectual Humility: Having Know1edge of Ignorance We will begin with the fair-minded trait of intelle ctual humility. Intellectual humility may be defined as having a consciousness of the limits of one’s knowledge, including a sensitivity to circumstances in which one’s native egocentrism is likely to function self-deceptively. This entails being aware of one’s biases, one’s prejudices, the limitations of one’s viewpoint, and the extent of one’s ignorance. Intellectual humility depends on recognizing that one should not claim more than one actually knows.It does not imply spinelessness or submissiveness. It implies the lack of intellectual pretentiousness, boastfulness, or conceit, combined with insight into the logical foundations, or lack of such foundations, of one’s beliefs. The opposite of intellectual humility is intellectual arrogance, a lack of consciousness of the limits of one’s knowledge, with little or no insight into self-deception or into the limitations of one’s point of view. Intellectually arrogant peopl e often fall prey to their own bias and prejudice, and frequently claim to know more than they actually know.When we think of intellectual arrogance, we are not necessarily implying a person who is outwardly smug, haughty, insolent, or pompous. Outwardly, the person may appear humble. For example, a person who uncritically believes in a cult leader may be outwardly self-effacing (â€Å"I am nothing. You are everything†), but intellectually he or she is making a sweeping generalization that is not well- founded, and has complete faith in that generalization. Unfortunately, in human life people of the full range of personality types are capable of believing they know what they don’t know.Our own false beliefs, misconceptions, prejudices, illusions, myths, propaganda, and ignorance appear to us as the plain, unvarnished truth. What is more, when challenged, we often resist admitting that our thinking is â€Å"defective. † We then are intellectually arrogant, even t hough we might feel humble. Rather than recognizing the limits of our knowledge, we ignore and obscure those limits. From such arrogance, much suffering and waste result. For example, when Columbus â€Å"discovered† North America, he believed that enslaving the Indians was compatible with God’s will.He did not inwardly—as far as we know—recognize that it was only through his intellectual arrogance that he could believe he knew â€Å"God’s will. † Intellectual arrogance is incompatible with fair-mindedness because we cannot judge fairly when we are in a state of ignorance about the object of our judgment. If we are ignorant about a religion (say, Buddhism), we cannot be fair in judging it. And if we have misconceptions, prejudices, or illusions about it, we will distort it (unfairly) in our judgment. We will misrepresent it—make it appear to be other than it is.Our false knowledge, misconceptions, prejudices, and illusions stand in the way of the possibility of our being fair. Or if we are intellectually arrogant, we will be inclined to judge too quickly and be overly confident in our judgment. Clearly, these tendencies are incompatible with being fair (to that which we are judging). Why is intellectual humility essential to higher-level thinking? In addition to helping us become fair-minded thinkers, knowledge of our ignorance can improve our thinking in a variety of ways.It can enable us to recognize the prejudices, false beliefs, and habits of mind that lead to flawed learning. Consider, for example, our tendency to accept superficial learning. Much human learning is superficial. We learn a little and think we know a lot. We get limited information and generalize hastily from it. We confuse memorized definitions with concrete knowledge. We uncritically accept much that we hear and read—especially when what we hear or read agrees with our intensely held beliefs or the beliefs of groups to which we belong .The discussion in the chapters that follow encourages intellectual humility and will help to raise your awareness of intellectual arrogance. See if you, from this moment, can begin to develop in yourself a growing awareness of the limitations of your knowledge and an increasing sensitivity to instances of your inadvertent intellectual arrogance. When you do, celebrate that sensitivity. Reward yourself for finding weaknesses in your thinking. Consider recognition of weakness an important strength, not a weakness. As a starter, answer the following questions: ? Can you construct a list of your most significant prejudices? Think of what you believe about your country, your religion, your friends, your family, simply because others—parents, friends, peer group, media—conveyed these to you. ) ? Do you ever argue for or against views when you have little evidence upon which to base your judgment? ? Do you ever assume that your group (your family, your religion, your nation, your friends) is correct (when it is in conflict with others) even though you have not looked at the situation from the point of view of the others with which you disagree? Intellectual Courage: Being Willing to Challenge BeliefsNow let’s consider intellectual courage. Intellectual courage may be defined as having a consciousness of the need to face and fairly address ideas, beliefs, or viewpoints toward which one has strong negative emotions and to which one has not given a serious hearing. Intellectual courage is connected to the recognition that ideas that society considers dangerous or absurd are sometimes rationally justified (in whole or in part). Conclusions and beliefs inculcated in people are sometimes false or misleading. To determine for oneself what makes sense, one must not passively and uncritically accept what one has learned.Intellectual courage comes into play here because there is some truth in some ideas considered dangerous and absurd, and distortion or f alsity in some ideas strongly held by social groups to which we belong. People need courage to be fair-minded thinkers in these circumstances. The penalties for nonconformity can be severe. The opposite of intellectual courage, intellectual cowardice, is the fear of ideas that do not conform to one’s own. If we lack intellectual courage, we are afraid of giving serious consideration to ideas, beliefs, or viewpoints that we perceive as dangerous.We feel personally threatened by some ideas when they conflict significantly with our personal identity—when we feel that an attack on the ideas is an attack on us as a person. All of the following ideas are â€Å"sacred† in the minds of some people: being a conservative, being a liberal; believing in God, disbelieving in God; believing in capitalism, believing in socialism; believing in abortion, disbelieving in abortion; believing in capital punishment, disbelieving in capital punishment. No matter what side we are on, we often say of ourselves: â€Å"I am a(an) [insert sacred belief here; for example, I am a Christian.I am a conservative. I am a socialist. I am an atheist]. † Once we define who we are in relation to an emotional commitment to a belief, we are likely to experience inner fear when that idea or belief is questioned. Questioning the belief seems to be questioning us. The intensely personal fear that we feel operates as a barrier in our minds to being fair (to the opposing belief). When we do seem to consider the opposing idea, we subconsciously undermine it, presenting it in its weakest form, in order to reject it. This is one form of intellectual cowardice.Sometimes, then, we need intellectual courage to overcome our self-created inner fear—the fear we ourselves have created by linking our identity to a specific set of beliefs. Another important reason to acquire intellectual courage is to overcome the fear of rejection by others because they hold certain beliefs and a re likely to reject us if we challenge those beliefs. This is where we invest the group with the power to intimidate us, and such power is destructive. Many people live their lives in the eyes of others and cannot approve of themselves unless others approve of them.Fear of rejection is often lurking in the back of their minds. Few people challenge the ideologies or belief systems of the groups to which they belong. This is the second form of intellectual cowardice. Both make it impossible to be fair to the ideas that are contrary to our, or our group’s, identity. You might note in passing an alternative way to form your personal identity. This is not in terms of the content of any given idea (what you actually believe) but, instead, in terms of the process by which you came to it. This is what it means to take on the identity of a critical thinker.Consider the following resolution. I will not identify with the content of any belief. I will identify only with the way I come to my beliefs. I am a critical thinker and, as such, am ready to abandon any belief that cannot be supported by evidence and rational considerations. I am ready to follow evidence and reason wherever they lead. My true identity is that of being a critical thinker, a lifelong learner, a person always looking to improve my thinking by becoming more reasonable in my beliefs. With such an identity, intellectual courage becomes more meaningful to us, and fair-mindedness more essential.We are no longer afraid to consider beliefs that are contrary to our present beliefs. We are not afraid of being proven wrong. We freely admit to having made mistakes in the past. We are happy to correct any mistakes we are still making: Tell me what you believe and why you believe it, and maybe I can learn from your thinking. I have cast off many early beliefs. I am ready to abandon as many of the present beliefs as are not consistent with the way things are. Intellectual Empathy: Entering Opposing Views Nex t let’s consider intellectual empathy, another trait of mind necessary to fair- mindedness.Intellectual empathy is an awareness of the need to imaginatively put oneself in the place of others so as to genuinely understand them. To have intellectual empathy is to be able to accurately reconstruct the viewpoints and reasoning of others and to reason from premises, assumptions, and ideas other than one’s own. This trait also correlates with the willingness to remember occasions when one was wrong in the past despite an intense conviction of being right, and with the ability to imagine being similarly deceived in a case at hand. The opposite of intellectual empathy is intellectual self-centeredness. It is thinking centered on self.When we think from a self-centered perspective, we are unable to understand others’ thoughts, feelings, and emotions. From this natural perspective, we are the recipients of most of our attention. Our pain, our desires, our hopes are most pressing. The needs of others pale into insignificance before the domination of our own needs and desires. We are unable to consider issues, problems, and questions from a viewpoint that differs from our own and that, when considered, would force us to change our perspective. How can we be fair to the thinking of others if we have not learned to put ourselves in their intellectual shoes?Fair-minded judgment requires a good-faith effort to acquire accurate knowledge. Human thinking emerges from the conditions of human life, from very different contexts and situations. If we do not learn how to take on the perspectives of others and to accurately think as they think, we will not be able to fairly judge their ideas and beliefs. Actually trying to think within the viewpoint of others is not easy, though. It is one of the most difficult skills to acquire. Intellectual Integrity: Holding Ourselves to the Same Standards to Which We Hold Ourselves Let us now consider intellectual integrity. Intellectual integrity is defined as recognition of the need to be true to one’s own thinking and to hold oneself to the same standards one expects others to meet. It means to hold oneself to the same rigorous standards of evidence and proof to which one holds one’s antagonists—to practice what one advocates for others. It also means to honestly admit discrepancies and inconsistencies in one’s own thought and action, and to be able to identify inconsistencies in one’s own thinking. The opposite of intellectual integrity is intellectual hypocrisy, a state of mind unconcerned with genuine integrity.It is often marked by deep-seated contradictions and inconsistencies. The appearance of integrity means a lot because it affects our image with others. Therefore, hypocrisy is often implicit in the thinking and action behind human behavior as a function of natural egocentric thinking. Our hypocrisy is hidden from us. Though we expect others to adhere to st andards to which we refuse to adhere, we see ourselves as fair. Though we profess certain beliefs, we often fail to behave in accordance with those beliefs. To the extent to which we have intellectual integrity, our beliefs and actions are consistent.We practice what we preach, so to speak. We don’t say one thing and do another. Suppose I were to say to you that our relationship is really important to me, but you find out that I have lied to you about something important to you. My behavior lacks integrity. I have acted hypocritically. Clearly, we cannot be fair to others if we are justified in thinking and acting in contradictory ways. Hypocrisy by its very nature is a form of injustice. In addition, if we are not sensitive to contradictions and inconsistencies in our own thinking and behavior, we cannot think well about ethical questions involving ourselves.Consider this political example. From time to time the media discloses highly questionable practices by the CIA. These practices run anywhere from documentation of attempted assassinations of foreign political leaders (say, attempts to assassinate President Castro of Cuba) to the practice of teaching police or military representatives in other countries (say, Central America or South America) how to torture prisoners to get them to disclose information about their associates.To appreciate how such disclosures reveal a lack of intellectual integrity, we only have to imagine how we would respond if another nation were to attempt to assassinate our president or trained American police or military in methods of torture. Once we imagine this, we recognize a basic inconsistency in our behavior and a lack of intellectual integrity on the part of those who plan, engage in, or approve of, that behavior. All humans sometimes fail to act with intellectual integrity.When we do, we reveal a lack of fair-mindedness on our part, and a failure to think well enough as to grasp the internal contradictions in our tho ught or life. Intellectual Perseverance: Working Through Complexity and Frustration Let us now consider intellectual perseverance. Intellectual perseverance can be defined as the disposition to work one’s way through intellectual complexities despite the frustration inherent in the task. Some intellectual problems are complex and cannot be easily solved. One has intellectual perseverance when one does not give up in the face of intellectual complexity or frustration.The intellectually perseverant person displays firm adherence to rational principles despite the irrational opposition of others, and has a realistic sense of the need to struggle with confusion and unsettled questions over an extended time to achieve understanding or insight. The opposite of intellectual perseverance is intellectual laziness, demonstrated in the tendency to give up quickly when faced with an intellectually challenging task. The intellectually indolent, or lazy, person has a low tolerance for inte llectual pain or frustration.How does a lack of intellectual perseverance impede fair-mindedness? Understanding the views of others requires that we do the intellectual work to achieve that understanding. That takes intellectual perseverance—insofar as those views are very different from ours or are complex in nature. For example, suppose we are a Christian wanting to be fair to the views of an atheist. Unless we read and understand the reasoning of intelligent and insightful atheists, we are not being fair to those views. Some intelligent and insightful atheists have written books to explain how and why they think as they do.Some of their reasoning is complicated or deals with issues of some complexity. It follows that only those Christians who have the intellectual perseverance to read and understand atheists can be fair to atheist views. Of course, a parallel case could be developed with respect to atheists’ understanding the views of intelligent and insightful Chri stians. Finally, it should be clear how intellectual perseverance is essential to almost all areas of higher-level thinking. Virtually all higher-level thinking involves some intellectual challenges that take intellectual perseverance to overcome.It takes intellectual perseverance to learn how to reason well in math, chemistry, physics, literature, art, and indeed any domain. Many give up during early stages of learning a subject. Lacking intellectual perseverance, they cut themselves off from all the insights that thinking through a subject provides. They avoid intellectual frustration, no doubt, but they end up with the everyday frustrations of not being able to solve the complex problems in their daily life. Confidence In Reason: Recognizing that Good Reasoning Has Proven Its Worth Let us now consider the trait of confidence in reason.Confidence in reason, in the long run, is based on the belief that one’s own higher interests and those of humankind at large will be best s erved by giving the freest play to reason, by encouraging people to come to their own conclusions by developing their own rational faculties; faith that, with proper encouragement and cultivation, people can learn to think for themselves, form insightful viewpoints, draw reasonable conclusions, think clearly, accurately, relevantly, and logically, persuade each other by appeal to good reason and sound evidence, and become reasonable persons, despite the deep-seated obstacles in human nature and social life. When one has confidence in reason, one is â€Å"moved† by reason in appropriate ways. The very idea of reasonability becomes one of the most important values and a focal point in one’s life. In short, to have confidence in reason is to use good reasoning as the fundamental criterion by which to judge whether to accept or reject any belief or position. The opposite of confidence in reason is intellectual distrust of reason, given by the threat that reasoning and rati onal analysis pose to the undisciplined thinker. Being prone toward emotional reactions that validate resent thinking, egocentric thinkers often express little confidence in reason. They do not understand what it means to have faith in reason. Instead, they have confidence in the truth of their own belief systems, however flawed they might be. In many ways we live in an irrational world surrounded by many forms of irrational beliefs and behaviors. For example, despite the success of science in providing plausible explanations based on careful study of evidence gathered through careful and disciplined observations, many people still believe in unsubstantiated systems such as astrology. Many people, when faced with a problem, follow their â€Å"gut† impulses.Many follow leaders whose only claim to credibility is that they are skilled in manipulating a crowd and whipping up enthusiasm. Few people seem to recognize the power of sound thinking in helping us to solves our problems and live a fulfilling life. Few people, in short, have genuine confidence in reason. In the place of faith in reason, people tend to have uncritical or â€Å"blind† faith in one or more of the following. They often— but not always—have this faith as a result of irrational drives and emotions: 1. Faith in charismatic national leaders (think of leaders such as Hitler, able to excite millions of people and manipulate them into supporting genocide of an entire religious group). 2.Faith in charismatic cult leaders. 3. Faith in the father as the traditional head of the family (as defined by religious or social tradition). 4. Faith in institutional authorities (police, social workers, judges, priests, evangelical preachers, and so forth). 5. Faith in spiritual powers (such as a â€Å"holy spirit,† as defined by various religious belief systems). 6. Faith in some social group, official or unofficial (faith in a gang, in the business community, in a church, in a p olitical party, and so on). 7. Faith in a political ideology (such as communism, capitalism, Fascism). 8. Faith in intuition. 9. Faith in one s unanalyzed emotions. 10.Faith in one’s gut impulses. 11. Faith in fate (some unnamed force that supposedly guides the destiny of all of us). 12. Faith in social institutions (the courts, schools, business community, government). 13. Faith in the folkways or mores of a social group or culture. 14. Faith in one’s own unanalyzed experience. 15. Faith in people who have social status or position (the rich, the famous, the powerful). Some of the above are compatible under some conditions, with faith in reason. The key factor is the extent to which some form of faith is based on sound reasoning and evidence. The acid test, then, is: Are there good grounds for having that faith?For example, it makes sense to have faith in a friend if that friend has consistently acted as a friend over an extended time. On the other hand, it does not m ake sense to have faith in a new acquaintance, even if one finds oneself emotionally attracted to that individual and that person professes his or her friendship. As you think about your own thinking on the nature of different kinds of faith, and the extent to which you have appropriate confidence in reason and evidence, ask yourself to what extent you can be moved by well-reasoned appeals. Suppose you meet someone who shows so much of an interest in your boyfriend or girlfriend that you feel intensely jealous and negative toward that person.Would you shift your view if you receive evidence by a dependable friend that the person you are negative about is actually exceptionally kind, thoughtful, and generous? Do you think you could shift your view, even when, deep-down, you want your boyfriend or girlfriend to reject this person in favor of you? Have you ever given up a belief you held dear because, through your reading, experience, and reflection, you became persuaded that it was no t reasonable to believe as you did? Are you ready and willing to admit that some of your most passionate beliefs (for example, your religious or political beliefs) may in fact be â€Å"wrong†? Intellectual Autonomy: Being an Independent Thinker The final intellectual trait we will consider here is intellectual autonomy.Intellectual autonomy may be defined as internal motivation based on the ideal of thinking for oneself: having rational self-authorship of one’s beliefs, values, and way of thinking; not being dependent on others for the direction and control of one’s thinking. In forming beliefs, critical thinkers do not passively accept the beliefs of others. Rather, they think through situations and issues for themselves and reject unjustified authorities while recognizing the contributions of reasonable authority. They thoughtfully form principles of thought and action and do not mindlessly accept those presented to them. They are not limited by accepted ways of doing things. They evaluate the traditions and practices that others often accept unquestioningly.Independent thinkers strive to incorporate knowledge and insight into their thinking, independent of the social status of the source. They are not willful, stubborn, or unresponsive to the reasonable suggestions of others. They are self-monitoring thinkers who strive to amend their own mistakes. They function from values they themselves have freely chosen. Of course, intellectual autonomy must be understood not as a thing-in-itself. Instead, we must recognize it as a dimension of our minds working in conjunction with, and tempered by, the other intellectual virtues. The opposite of intellectual autonomy is intellectual conformity, or intellectual dependence.Intellectual autonomy is difficult to develop because social institutions, as they now stand, depend heavily on passive acceptance of the status quo, whether intellectual, political, or economic. Thinking for oneself almost certai nly leads to unpopular conclusions not sanctioned by the powers that be. There are always many rewards for those who simply conform in thought and action to social expectations. Consequently, the large masses of people are unknowing conformists in thought and deed. They are like mirrors reflecting the belief systems and values of those who surround them. They lack the intellectual skills and the incentive to think for themselves. They are intellectually conforming thinkers. Even those who spend years getting a Ph. D. in a field may be intellectually dependent, both academically and personally.They may uncritically accept faulty practices in the discipline as it stands, uncritically defending the discipline against legitimate critics. The result often is unwarranted human harm and suffering. One cannot be fair-minded and lack intellectual autonomy, for independent thinking is a prerequisite to thinking within multiple perspectives. When we intellectually conform, we are only able to think within â€Å"accepted† viewpoints. But to be fair-minded is to refuse to uncritically accept beliefs without thinking through the merits (and demerits) of those beliefs for oneself. Recognizing the Interdependence of Intellectual Virtues The traits of mind essential for critical thinking are interdependent. Consider intellectual humility.To become aware of the limits of our knowledge, we need the intellectual courage to face our own prejudices and ignorance. To discover our own prejudices in turn, we often must intellectually empathize with and reason within points of view with which we fundamentally disagree. To achieve this end, we typically must engage in intellectual perseverance, as learning to empathically enter a point of view against which we are biased takes time and significant effort. That effort will not seem justified unless we have the necessary confidence in reason to believe we will not be tainted or â€Å"taken in† by whatever is false or mislead ing in the opposing viewpoint.Furthermore, merely believing we won’t be harmed by considering â€Å"alien† viewpoints is not enough to motivate most of us to consider them seriously. We also must be motivated by an intellectual sense of justice. We must recognize an intellectual responsibility to be fair to views we oppose. We must feel obliged to hear them in their strongest form to ensure that we are not condemning them out of ignorance or bias on our part. At this point, we come full circle to where we began: the need for intellectual humility. To begin at another point, consider intellectual integrity or good faith. Intellectual integrity is clearly a difficult trait to develop. We are often motivated—generally without admitting to or being aware of this motivation— to set up inconsistent standards in thinking.Our egocentric or sociocentric tendencies, for example, make us ready to believe positive information about those we like and negative informat ion about those we dislike. We likewise are strongly inclined to believe what serves to justify our selfish interests or validate our strongest desires. Hence, all humans have some innate mental tendencies to operate with double standards, which is typical of intellectual bad faith. These modes of thinking often correlate quite well with getting ahead in the world, maximizing our power or advantage, and getting more of what we want. Nevertheless, it is difficult to operate explicitly or overtly with a double standard. We therefore need to avoid looking at the evidence too closely.We need to avoid scrutinizing our own inferences and interpretations too carefully. At this point, a certain amount of intellectual arrogance is quite useful. I may assume, for example, that I know just what you’re going to say (before you say it), precisely what you are really after (before the evidence demonstrates it), and what actually is going on (before I have studied the situation carefully). My intellectual arrogance makes it easier for me to avoid noticing the unjustifiable discrepancy between the standards I apply to you and the standards I apply to myself. Not having to empathize with you makes it easier to avoid seeing my self-deception.I also am better positioned if I lack a need to be fair to your point view. A little background fear of what I might discover if I seriously consider the consistency of my own judgments can be quite useful as well. In this case, my lack of intellectual integrity is supported by my lack of intellectual humility, empathy, and fair-mindedness. Going in the other direction, it will be difficult to use a double standard if I feel a responsibility to be fair to your point of view, to see that this responsibility requires me to view things from your perspective empathically, and to do so with some humility, recognizing that I could be wrong, and you, right. The more I dislike you personally, or feel wronged in he past by you or by others wh o share your way of thinking, the more pronounced in my character the trait of intellectual integrity and good faith must be to compel me to be fair. Conclusion True excellence in thinking is not simple the result of isolated intellectual skills. There are inevitable problems in the thinking of persons who, without knowing it, lack the intellectual virtues. Instead, they frequently display the traits of the undisciplined mind. To the extent one is unconsciously motivated to believe what one wants to believe, what is most comfortable to believe, what puts one in a good light, what serves one’s selfish interest, one is unable to function as a rational person.

Snowdrops – Creative Writing

When would Reece be back? I sat on my bed and daydreamed, all the good times we had had together flashing through my mind, filling me up with the sensation I was flying. I came back to earth with a thud. Glancing at the clock only made me feel worse – half past eleven. Reece was usually home by ten. Sighing, still worried, I lay my head down on my pillow, just to rest my eyes for a few minutes†¦ And awoke with a jolt, to the rhythmic thudding of a heavy hand on the front door. For a split second, I held the thought that it could be Reece, complete with a totally reasonable, acceptable excuse, and he would hold me and everything would be alright again. That image vanished, when I realised Reece never knocked like that. Frozen with panic, I sat upright. The knocking continued. A sudden burst of courage took me totally unawares. Hurriedly, I pulled on my red dressing gown. Dashing down the stairs, I grabbed the keys to the door. Slowly, I advanced. With feline agility, I tip-toed to the door. With a shaky hand, I put the key in the key-hole. Deftly I turned the knob. Willing my suspicions to be erroneous, I peeped through the crack I had created between the door and the doorframe. There, silhouetted against the eerie moon, stood a great figure, portentously broad and equally tall, the mere look of whom would worry all but the bravest. I slumped with relief. ‘Hello Gwen.' I said, letting out the deep breath I didn't know I was holding. Gwen was the village policeman, a gentle giant to all who knew him, but certainly one of the most intimidating men to meet in the street. This was down mainly to his incredible width, which prevented anyone walking either side of him on a pavement. Talking to Gwen was like conversing with a ship, he was big, slow, and found it notoriously hard to change direction in a subject. But why was he here? ‘Hello, Sarah,' he said, not a hint of happiness in his voice. ‘What's wrong? Why are you here?' Gwen's face creased up. He was almost in tears. I had never seen him like this before, and I wasn't sure how to react. ‘What's wrong, Gwen? Is someone hurt? Tell me, Gwen!' By now, tears were rolling down Gwen's cheeks. I had no idea what was going on: I was totally confused. ‘There's been an accident, Sarah,' Reece whispered, his voice hoarse. ‘Reece, he, he's had an accident. He was speeding, he hit a lorry, he†¦' ‘He what? What happened? Is he okay?' I screeched, frantic to know the answer. Gwen gulped. ‘He passed away at half past ten. He was speeding on his motorcycle, he hit the back of a lorry. I – I'm sorry.' I froze. He was speeding. Speeding to see me. ‘What?' I whispered, ‘No surely, there's a mistake. Reece can't be dead, it's just – no, no, this isn't right, it must be, I, I†¦' I stopped. I felt my body numb, as the realisation took hold of me. He was gone, and I couldn't bring him back. The emptiness was overwhelming, like a dark pit had opened inside of me that sucked all my thoughts, memories, emotions into it, leaving me drained. Then it spat it all back out again, and the fullness was overwhelming. Anger, fear, grief, hate, it all spilled out with the tears that gushed from my eyes. I slumped into Gwen's arms, as he took me through my house, the house that had seemed so warm and full of life only moments before, now cold, dark and foreboding. Down on my settee he sat me, all the time whispering . I needed to be alone. I told Gwen so, rudely, but being polite was the last thing on my mind. He left, and I wept. Alone I sat out the night, unable to face sleeping alone. I was lost, I didn't know what to do or where to go. I knew I had to work tomorrow, there were hardly enough teachers at the school as it was, but I couldn't comprehend facing a single sensible adult, never mind a classroom full of children who scarcely knew the meaning of sad. By the time the early rays of spring sun hit my windowpane, I had made up my mind. I had a responsibility to the children, and I knew it was what Reece would have wanted. I had to teach the children. At six o'clock, as per usual, I arose and got dressed from head to toe in black. The colour of death, but also a symbol of authority. There was no sleepiness in my morning schedule, yet I was not fully awake. I got ready lifelessly, listlessly. Breakfast was missed – I fasted on – and set off early to avoid the mixed looks from the locals dotted around the village. It didn't work. As I walked through the centre of the village, I could feel the eyes upon my, burning through the headscarf I hid underneath. Quickly and determinedly, I headed up the small dirt track that lead to the school. The emptiness was still there, lurking threateningly at the back of my mind. Consciously pushing it even further back, I braced myself for the day ahead. Needless to say, that day wasn't my proudest as a teacher. As I walked into the classroom half an hour later than normal, the staring eyes of the naà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ve children almost reduced me to tears a second time. A sympathetic look from the young blonde teacher did nothing to console me, but I stayed strong – for Reece, and for the children. Taking a deep breath, putting on the nicest, sweetest voice I could muster, I addressed the children. ‘Hello, boys and girls.' ‘Hello Miss Webster,' they reply, chirpy as always. A lump welled in my throat, I began to sway again, so I grabbed the desk for support and took another deep breath. ‘Now, today boys and girls, we'll be drawing pictures of our favourite things for outside. Does everyone have something they like best?' Every head nodded. ‘Good. Peter, please give everyone a pencil. Glenys, can you give everyone a piece of paper please. Thank you.' As the two young kids set of to perform their duties, swollen with pride at being chose by the teacher to do a job. I sat on the edge on my old chair at the front of the classroom. The room was silent, save for the scribbling of pencils on paper and occasional unintelligible murmur from a child, hard at work. My mind drifted, back to Reece. His face drifted to the forefront of my mind, his features already beginning to haze as I used only my memory to imagine him. Just as I got his face into full focus, the emptiness that had been lying in wait at the rear of my mind crept forward, looming behind the smiling face. I tried to push it back, but there was nothing to push. His face melted away, the blankness washed over him like the sea rushing over drawings in the sand. It hit me a second time: I was alone. I jolted out of my seat, startled back into reality. I saw the upset look on the face of the little boy, QQQQQ who had come to show me the picture he had drawn. A robin. Fitting, I thought. Robins didn't migrate to the warmth with the other birds when winter came: Robins faced the harsh, bleak, cold winter alone. I felt I must do the same. I knelt down, plucked the picture from his hand and pinned it on the wall. I looked over at the old clock hung high on the wall, and saw it was break time. I excused the children as pleasantly as I could muster, and followed them out to the school playground. I stood for twenty minutes under the cold spring sun, and called for the children to come back in. Watching over them as they re-entered the school, one of the other teachers, Mrs Jones, a busybody by all means, in her late fifties, scurried towards me. ‘How're you coping, dearie?' she enquired, her caring tone easy to see through. I could do no more than nod. ‘Well the funeral's today, at half-past midday. Men only, of course, but they should pass right by on old Luther way.' The funeral. It had completely passed me by, and I felt ashamed for it. Traditional Welsh funeral of course, no female attendees, but perhaps if I could find a reasonable excuse†¦ The snowdrops. Of course, I had promised the children that I would show them the beautiful spring flowers. If I timed it right, the procession would pass right by. ‘Thank you, Mrs Jones,' I replied with a nod, as I entered the classroom. It was quarter to twelve. Half an hour. I pulled out the big story book from the bookshelf, and called around all the children as I sat down with it. Normally, I would put my heart and soul into reading aloud to the children, but today they were completely preoccupied, so my voice was flat and monotonous. The children were disappointed, but I had too much on my mind to attempt to remedy their disillusionment. I glanced up at the clock every five minutes, as the big hand turned slowly around on the wall. My whole body was tense, my throat was dry, my voice rasping. At twelve fifteen, I slammed the book shut, stood up, and led the children briskly through the chill outside air, hand in hand, to the bottom of the school grounds, where the snowdrops grew. As I watched their amazed faces stare in astonishment at the little white specks of purity, I could not help but long to be a child again, youthful and kept away from the harsh realties of life. Then I heard the bittersweet funeral chant, deep, dark and hauntingly beautiful, and my hands clutched at the little white gate leading to the road. My eyes blurred over and I cried, cried for all the good times and the bad times, wept in longing and loneliness, knowing I was destined to live my life incomplete.

Essay on Leadership part 2

Essay on Leadership part 2 Essay on Leadership part 2 Essay on Leadership part 2Essay on Leadership part  1Leadership dynamicsIndra Nooyi’s leadership dynamics allowed the company to hold the leading position on the global markets. Indar Nooyi made a decision to â€Å"increase the size of her executive team to 20 members, allowing for a broader distribution of management decision-making power† (Cunningham Harney, 2012, p. 631). Indra Nooyi’s leadership style is focused on the principle of â€Å"performance with purpose,† which means that leaders should use the proper strategies to generate as much profit as possible from business, but at the same time, they should be socially responsible for their actions. Nooyi’s activity and leadership approach can be defined as transformational leadership. Indra Nooyi inspires her employees to follow the strategy aimed at the required organizational change. Nooyi has developed an effective strategy of PepsiCo’s growth on the global market, but she also is highly focused on the greater good for the world (Williams, 2010; Cunningham Harney, 2012).In addition, Indra Nooyi’s leadership approach demonstrates the major aspect of Kouzes and Posner’s Transformational Leadership Model. She allows others to act, and she is always ready to listen to the ideas of her employees. She may use their ideas in her decision making process (Winston, 2008). Indra Nooyi acts as an executive leader because she is involved not only in executive sponsorship, but also in instruction and coaching activities.Management dynamicsIndra Nooyi has a huge experience of management practices. She held top management positions in PepsiCo and other companies. Indra Nooyi’s management skills and her education allow her to develop effective management dynamics. Indra Nooyi demonstrates her cultural sensibility and emotional intelligence which help her to perform management tasks in a proper way (Williams, 2010).   She says that education she got at Yale helped her to develop excellent communication skills. She benefited from various management strategies, including the feedback from mentors. As she is well known as an advocate of multicultural teams and corporate diversity, her managerial strategies were aimed at hiring the employees of varied backgrounds, and promoting disparate perspectives of PepsiCo (Cunningham Harney, 2012). According to experts, Indra Nooyi also benefited from effective employee programs introduced at PepsiCo (Williams, 2010).   She says, â€Å"I am everything that this company has stood for in diversity and inclusion; it has all come together with me† (Abu-Tineh et al., 2009, p. 271).Actually, Indra Nooyi is considered to be one of the most dynamic leaders in the world. She has become one of the most influential women leaders in the corporate world today due to her exclusive management skills (Cunningham Harney, 2012). From the beginning of her career, Nooyi has demonstrated her best manageme nt skills, which help her to become a successful business woman and never give up. Her management skills affect her ability to easily adapt to changes in organizational environment. She is well-known as a practical, self-confident and courageous leader. Her key principle is to keep an open mind in order to use her effective communication style to drive her employees. Indra Nooyi believes that any effective leader should take care of his/her people. This belief is one of the most important parts of Indra Nooyi’s management (Cunningham Harney, 2012).Group/Team DynamicsIndra Nooyi as an effective leader is focused on team building. She has the ability to apply the skills, experience and talents of her team. Indra Nooyi is focused on invention and innovation in her activity, which provides the organization’s growth and promotes continuous renewal. She uses her team dynamics to embrace organizational change and use effective practices (Cunningham Harney, 2012; Fitzsimmons et al., 2011).Despite the increased number of multicultural teams, PepsiCo is one of global organizations that are â€Å"tapping the potential of their employees with more than one culture† (Fitzsimmons et al., 2011, p. 199). Indra Nooyi is aware of the skills her employees possess.   She effectively uses her multicultural team’s potential to contribute to the major international business activities of PepsiCo.   Group/Team Dynamics of Indra Nooyi involves the following elements: successful multicultural teams, effective intercultural negotiations, the application of the key principles of ethics and leadership, expatriation practices, as well as international mergers and acquisitions practices (Fitzsimmons et al., 2011).   Today PepsiCo, as a global organization, can effectively use the unique skills, experience, knowledge and individual perspectives of its multicultural teams (Fitzsimmons et al., 2011).Conclusion  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Thus , it is necessary to conclude that Indra Nooyi is an effective leader, whose leadership approach can be viewed as a role model for others in today’s business environment. Indra Nooyi serves not only her company and her employee, but also the whole society she lives in. She effectively uses her personal business experience and professionalism in leadership practices to succeed on the global market. She is a leader who possesses solid beliefs in organizational growth, leadership strength and the contribution of her employees. Indra Nooyi has demonstrated her skills, abilities and the potential to contributing much more to PepsiCo’s development. She is focused on the continued growth and development of the company. As a result, she has formulated the appropriate strategies aimed at stimulating her efforts through her unique leadership style. She managed to enhance, direct and change the functioning of PepsiCo. As a female business leader, Indra Nooyi recognizes how she ca n significantly affect not only PepsiCo, but also the world’s global economy. Indra Nooyi’s organizational dynamics has a strong impact on the overall functioning of the organization, employee motivation and job satisfaction and corporate culture.

African American and American Society Essay Example for Free (#2)

African American and American Society Essay African American (597) , African (466) , Racism (370) , American society (32) company About StudyMoose Contact Careers Help Center Donate a Paper Legal Terms & Conditions Privacy Policy Complaints ? African Americans No matter where or when a person lives, skin color, beliefs, class, or history he/she will see a difference in the way every ethnic group is treated. This world has never been fair for anyone. Life can treat a person with the greatest of care or it will treat a person as if he/she is lower than dirt. African Americans are no different. They have faced great hardships and triumphs throughout the years. Since they had been forced from their homeland they have been treated as if they had no rights or thoughts of their own. They were placed in the status of slaves even though they were human beings too. No matter if they were placed in the minority group by the dominate majority group of white Americans they remind structurally pluralism by keeping to their beliefs and traditions. Before and after slavery African Americans did not receive equal treatment. â€Å"Even when slavery ended, Jim Crow laws went into effect meaning that the very best of everything was reserved for white’s only-school, jobs, neighborhoods, hospitals, etc. † (Moore, 2008). In other words, the African Americans took the subordinate status to the dominant white Americans. Their race was used to dictate what rights they would be allowed to have in America. At one point, they did not have the right to be free and over the years they were given that right back. Even though they regained their right to be free, they still were not very free. They were only allowed to eat in certain places, drink from certain fountains, and ride in the back of the bus. This is not what would be called very free. They were not even given the opportunities to receive a quality education or to vote. â€Å"With the 1896 Supreme Court decision in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson, the separate by equal doctrine was upheld, and the system of segregation in the South was securely in place† (Merger, 2012, pg. 169). When it came to getting a quality education, they were placed at the bottom of the totem pole. The whites receive the best opportunities for receiving a quality education while the African Americans were not. It was not until the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka case that African Americans were allowed a better education. â€Å"Separate schools were inherently unequal and imposed an inferior status on black children, causing irreparable psychological change† (Merger, 2012, pg. 173). The rights as citizens were also being denied by not allowing them to vote and make a proper living to take care of theirfamilies. Years ago, African Americans were not allowed to vote, so they had no say in the laws that were made that would deny them their rights as American citizens or human beings. This kept them from changing the laws that kept them from achieving economically and politically. The Civil Right Movement began a new era for African American. It was their gain of the right to vote and be elected to office that gave the some power over their rights as human beings and citizen in the economic and political environment. Even after everything that the African Americans have gone through, they still face prejudice and discrimination in all areas of their lives. It is no wonder that for some it feels as if it is never over. No matter what a person looks like, how he/she talks, their beliefs, where he/she lives, how much money he/she has, or what race he/she may come from we all bleed red and where cut from the same cloth. We all deserve to have the opportunities and resources that are out there to help better ourselves. African Americans are human beings too and they have the same rights as everyone else. African American and American Society. (2016, Dec 19).

Plato Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 1

Plato - Essay Example ?The Allegory of the Cave† is taken from â€Å"The Republic† where he deftly handles the lack of knowledge of human beings and he elicits his answer from the mouth of Socrates his mentor. In this particular piece of writing, Plato cuts a clear distinction between knowledge of reality and shadows of illusion (ignorance) To portray this fact he takes the example of a cave in which human beings are chained to a wall with only a tiny light that casts shadowy images which some of the inhabitants take for reality. Those who are freed from the cave have a true knowledge of reality. Plato’s masterly use of imagery of light to depict knowledge and darkness to depict ignorance gives his essay the excellence it deserves, making it one of the most memorable ones. In his explanation of â€Å"absolute knowledge† and the way it affects the â€Å"shadows of images of justice†, he gives us another example of a person who is asked to look straight at the light. In doing so, the person is dazzled and feels pain and hence is unable to see the reality for what it is. But if his eyes get accustomed to the light, his vision would be clearer and he is moves on from seeing the shadowy images, to seeing the real objects. Finally he is able to gaze upon the sun in all its brightness and judge himself rightly. He would then be in a position to look back on his fellow prisoners who still live in the shadows of images and feel pity for them. This is what Plato means by â€Å"absolute justice†. According to Plato, it is better to suffer anything, than to live a miserable life filled with false notions and ideas. If a person lives a life in the shadows of ignorance, he would never learn the realities in life. But on the other hand, if his vision is not blocked or marred by the shadows of images, his vision would be so clear and he would be able to lead others out of their ignorance. In other words, if a person attains this beatific vision, he is unable to draw himself down to a lower level of