Its Time for West Virginia to Eliminate Food Tax Essay -- Argumentati

It's Time for West Virginia to Eliminate Food Tax Can you recall an incident in American history involving disgruntled citizens dumping tea into the Boston Harbor? I can. This tea dumping was one of the foremost events of the revolution. Do you remember why these angry citizens dressed as Indians, stormed one of their own boats, and dumped all of the crates of tea into the harbor? The English monarchy’s taxing of the settlers’ tea caused this uprising. Right now, West Virginia’s government is levying an almost identical tax; the government is taxing the very food that West Virginians eat for survival. Doesn’t the government tax enough each year without taxing something that is required for our very sustenance? According to USA Today, "The government takes more money in other taxes each year than the average American spends on food, shelter, and clothing combined." (Armey, internet) At least the first Americans could choose whether or not they would drink tea. Currently, West Virginians do not have the cho ice whether or not to eat food. Why should we have to pay any more than the store charges us for the food? It is time for the legislature in West Virginia to reform West Virginia’s tax system and do away with the ridiculous tax on food. Initially, a West Virginia food tax doesn’t seem like such a bad idea, but after contemplating the principles, it becomes more and more unethical. Ethically, why should West Virginians pay tax on food when many other American citizens do not? Consequently, a West Virginia food tax is unethical in that it punishes the poor. Every year in West Virginia, poor children go hungry because their families can’t afford to put food on the table. I conducted an independent survey involving fifty anon... ... On Food Would Aid The Poor" St Louis Post Dispatch. 3-28-97 page 1 and 2 Bill Rankin. "Like most tax cuts, state’s elimination of food sales tax hinders real: reform". Atlanta Journal and Constitution. 6 October 1996. http://www.elibrary.com/ Sam Attlesey. "Democrats support sales tax amendment: Proposal would ban levy on food, medicine". The Dallas Morning News. 19 March 1998. www.elibrary.com Andrew Cain. "Help take a bite out of food tax". The Washington Times". 29 September 1998. Gene Callahan. "Bandersnatch Tax cut Proposal". http://www.bandersnatch.com/ Warren McGraw. "Elect Warren McGraw to the supreme court". Radio Commercial. 27 October 1998. Staton, Rick. Personal interview. 7 Nov. 1998. Cecil Underwood. "Governor’s Commission on Fair Taxation". www.state.wv.us/fairtax/agenda.htm Cadle, Pat. Personal interview. 8 Nov. 1998

To Kill a Mockingbird - Theme of Innocence :: Free Essay Writer

To Kill a Mockingbird - Theme of Innocence       Innocence is a time when a person has never done something, it is the first step of the theme of innocence to experience. The second step in the movement from innocence to experience, is experience. This step is what is achieved after a person or thing has done something they have never done before or learns something they have never know before. The theme of growth from innocence to experience occurs many times in the first part of To Kill a Mockingbird, by Harper Lee. This process is one of the central themes in the first eleven chapters of this book, because it shows how Scout and Jem change and mature.    In To Kill a Mockingbird, by Harper Lee, there are many great examples of Jem or Scout moving from innocence to experience. One of these is on page 24 when Scout learns the proper way to treat a guest. After Scout has a fight with Walter Cunningham, Jem invites him to dinner. During the meal, Scout watches Walter pour a lot of syrup on his food. Thinking it unusual, Scout inquired about why he was doing it. Her comment embarrasses Walter. Calpernia, the housekeeper, brings her into the kitchen and tells her that she should never comment on the ways of their guest's eating habits or otherwise. To drive home her point, Calpernia not only informs Scout of her mistake, she slaps her.    Prior to these events happening, Scout had never know that it was improper to make fun of or judge a guest of the house. In her innocence, she had never before realized this behavior was inappropriate. The hit as well as the scolding have removed her innocence. Scout is now very aware of her mistake. With her new experience, she will most likely never embarrass a house guest again. She has learned her lesson.    In my life I have also gone through many situations that have taken me across the threshold of innocence to experience. One example of this would be, that when I was young, I was unaware that leaning back in a chair was dangerous. This would be my innocence, but one day when I was leaning back, I fell to the ground and took off the skin on my chin.

The Death of Antigone :: Essays on Antigone

In Sophocles’ Antigone, Antigone saw her action of burying her brother as a just one. It may not have been just in the eyes of Creon and the people of Thebes, but she was not concerned with the laws that mortals had made. Antigone saw the divine laws of the gods to be much more important than those of mortals. She felt that if she died while upholding the laws of the gods, that her afterlife would be better than if she had not. Our lives on this earth are so short, that to see a good afterlife over the horizon will make people go against the laws of humans. Early in the play, Antigone felt dying for her brother was a noble action. Death to her was not an ending, but a new beginning in a better place. Antigone’s family had been cursed for ages; death was something that followed at their heels. The people of Thebes would always look at her with suspicious eyes. Her father, Oedipus, had caused these looks to be placed on her family forever. Then her brothers killed one another on the same day; her life in Thebes was not good. With such a bad life in Thebes, an honorable death must have looked very appealing to Antigone. In most societies, as well as Thebes, the afterlife is taught to be much more important than your mortal life. The problem is that we do not know what is waiting on the other side for us. Antigone thought that if she were to please the gods in her life that she could only expect good things in the afterlife. The burial of Polyneices was her ticket to a good afterlife. The afterlife is eternal, and life is just a small spec, compared to the time spent in death. Antigone welcomed death at the time of burying her brother; she was not concerned with the consequences. She saw her actions as being true to the gods and religion. â€Å"I myself will bury him. It will be good to die, so doing. I shall lie by his side, loving him as he loved me; I shall be a criminal but – a religious one.† (Antigone, lines 81-85) To Antigone, the honor of her brother, and her family was all that was important. She may be going against Creon, but if her actions were true in her heart then the gods would see her in a good light.

Literary Elements Essay

The following paper will discuss how symbolism and characters relate and contribute to the overall theme behind the story, â€Å"The Necklace.† Those symbols and characters suggest that just because something is perceived to be beautiful and worthy, that deception could be the reality. The theme of a story is basically the idea behind the story (Clugston 2010). In Guy de Maupassant’s â€Å"The Necklace,† the theme could be concluded as being the idea that appearances are deceptive. For most people, appearances are the most important aspects in life. Social stature, wealth, and physical appearances can conflict with a person in regards to importance as seen by one ’s self and by others leading to deception. In the story Madame Loisel perceives herself as something she is not. She believes that she should be that of wealthy and lavished with material items. In reality she is of the middle class coming from a family of employees, not rich at all. To her, material items, looks, and social status are what make a person â€Å"wealthy.† The fact of having a loving husband, a comfortable home, and dinner on the table is of no importance because she does not have the diamonds, furs, or the extravagant house, which to her are the most important as pects of life. A symbol is something that has literal meaning, but stands for something else (Clugston 2010). Symbolism is used numerous times in the story. When Matilde visits her friend that she envies, she is told to look through what seemed to be the most luxurious box housing numerous expensive pieces of jewelry. She did not realize that the box, in fact, housed a worthless piece of deception. Madame Loisel had a hard time deciding which would be the most affective when flaunting her so-called beauty at the party containing all the higher class people. The one that radiated the most was the one that best suited her. She was ignorant of the fact that such an appearance could be as deceptive as the appearance she would display in the crowd. The necklace itself symbolizes the true meaning of deceptive appearances. It shimmers and shines and changes in the story. That change goes unnoticed by Madame Forestier. It changes from worthless to precious and that suggests that the true value of something only depends on the perception of the appearance. Those perceptions and appearances can be easily deceivable. For Madame Loisel, the appearance of a diamond necklace from a box containing numerous pieces of jewelry was precious and can only be seen as such. Characterization is used in the story by the author to describe the overall appearance of Madame Loisel and her thoughts and feelings about her appearance and her thoughts on the appearances of others. She is described as being a beautiful woman on the outside, but not as beautiful on the inside, adding to the theme of deceptive appearances. Her appearance at the party seems like that of higher class being she is wearing a nice dress with an â€Å"expensive† piece of jewelry. She is noticed by many while socializing and dancing forgetting about the reality that waits for her in the other room. Being unappreciative of what she has makes her beautiful appearance deceivable because beauty if more than just physical appearance. Her actions lead to harsh results that make her poor in physical appearance and assets. The characters and symbols in the story contribute to the theme in ways of defining the true meaning of deceptive appearances. The appearance of the jewelry box is illustrated as giving the jewelry a sense of richness. The necklace is viewed as a source of power and gives the main character feelings of higher self-worth even though it is worthless. Madame Loisel is a beautiful woman at the beginning of the story, but the readers know the lack of true beauty she has. She tries to mislead the higher class with her appearance after buying the new dress and borrowing the diamond necklace. This in turn leads to her misfortune and leaves the audience in shock when the truth about the necklace is brought to light. Reference Clugston, R.,W. 2010. Journey into literature. Retrieved from: https://content.ashford.edu/ Books/AUENG125.10.2

The building of Greek State after the 1821 revolution

March 25, 1821, was the day of the Annunciation of the Theotokos of the Greek Orthodox. It was also the day of Greek rebellion and declaration of independence which was actually achieved in 1829. This paper examines the events, some issues, and prominent figures who contributed in building the Greek State which started in 1821. The influences of the Great Powers (Great Britain, France and Russia) The Greeks were suppressed and controlled by Turks under Ottoman Empire resulting to the death of 25,000 Greeks on the island of Chios and 15,000 Greeks and 40,000 Turks in the Peloponessos.The Greeks started to revolt in 1821. The Philiki Etairian leaders wanted to foster consciousness and resistance against the oppression of the Turks. Its leadership was first offered to Ioannis Kapodistrias of Corfu, who refused to accept due to misguided venture and a wrong timing, but it was accepted by Alexander Ipsiladis, a Phanariot, in 1820. Kapodistrias was assassinated after a few years. The Great Powers (France, Russia, and Great Britain) ruled Greece with the leadership of King Ludwig I of Bavaria who imposed monarchy but he was eventually voted out by the Greek Parliament.George I of Denmark took over after Ludwig I. Before 1824 has ended, the Peloponnese, including 2000 Egyptian army lead by Papaflesas was invaded by Sultan Mahmoud II and Ibrahim with 6000 Turks. They attacked and killed around 600 Greeks in Maniaki on the 20th day of May 1825. The Great Powers, favored the Greeks, initiated direct military intervention in July 1827, and mediated the quarrel between the Turks and the Greeks. Russia maintained the significance of Orthodox Christianity while France showed strong sympathy towards the Greek volunteers.The Orthodox Church was the basis of people’s cultural and economic life and it also hindered the stated from rapid change towards development since its ideas and teachings were opposed to those of the western nations. The Allied forces proposed an armis tice in order to conclude the battle. Greece accepted it but Turkey refused to reconcile. As a result, the Allied fleet was set to sail off the west coast of the Peloponnese through Navarino on October 20, 1827 under Admiral Codrington to support Greece.The Ottoman fleet fought against the Allied forces but it failed. In September 1829, Demetrios Ypsilanti, the brother of Alexander Ypsilanti, defeated the Turkish force in the border between Thebes and Livadia. This was the last engagement of the Turks and the time when Greek independence was achieved through the attainment of Peace of Adrianople between Russia and Turkey. People who contributed in the success of Greek revolution The attainment of freedom in Greece was realized due to the contribution of prominent figures that fought for freedom.Five among them were: (1) Theodoros Kolokotronis (1770 – 1834), a local hero, who lead in defeating Mahmud Dramali's army in 1822 of the Ottoman Empire as well the siege of Tripolis, w hich eventually surrendered and it marked the success of the Greek revolution for the first time; (2) Georgios Karaiskakis (1782 – 1827) was a military genius appointed as chief marshal of Eastern Greece and the first one to take part in the Greek revolution whose two victories at Arachova and Distomo made him famous; (3) Constantinos Kanaris (1793 – 1877) from Psara was successful in destroying Turkish fleets at Chios, Tenedos, Mytilene, Samos, and Alexandrian port to prevent Mehmet Ali's war preparations, for example; (4) Gregorios Dikaios (1788 – 1825), also named Papaflesas, was born at Messinia and became a monk in his teens. He was forced by the Turks to leave Greece due to his revolutionary character so he reached Constantinople and joined â€Å"Filiki Etairia†.Ypsilantis ordered him to return to Peloponnesos where he and started recruiting people for the revolution. He courageously fought against Ibrahim with 6000 Turks on 20 May 1825 until he die d; and (5) Nikitaras, head of the pallikars band, had successfully fought Kiaya Bey at Kaki Scala in March and April 1822 at Ayia Marina under Odysseus rule and was given a nickname of Tourkophagos when he killed 3,000 Turks in the battle. The diaspora and the building of the new State The Ottoman Empire had paralyzed the Greeks who had not undergone Renaissance, Reformation, and Enlightenment which resulted to slow progress and development of the lies of people in rural communities.The proponents of modernization brought western culture and parliamentary government, bureaucracy, and educational institutions to keep the nation in tact but its counterparts wanted to maintain their relationship with the motherland, which hindered modernization. The number of Greek migrants has increased with their aspirations for economic freedom and improvement. Romanticism became apparent through Lord Byron who supported the Greek revolutionaries and died in 1824. In 1828, Greece embraced a republic an constitution and the Turkish troops who occupied Acropolis left when the Allied Forces turned Greece into a monarchial democratic State in which the government’s political and judicial affairs are ruled of a Royal leader.They were interested in sovereign, the head of the State with the will of the people through election as the only source of the head’s power. The Greeks, including the ethnic group were able to expand its boundaries and conquered European territories. Many of them succeed, became leaders, and gained support from other nations. This diaspora has led to the building of the modern Greek State in 1830. The new State: Identities, political issues, and other problems Greeks who were living outside their motherland hoped for an independent State similar to the European model with a centralized constitution, army and navy, and diplomatic representatives. It was only realized under the leadership of King Otho of Bavaria.In 1831, the Allied Powers conducted a conference in London regarding the establishment of the new State and issued a protocol on February 23, 1832. One significant problem of the new State was that it is filled with Russian leaders. Otho was only seventeen years old when he was offered for the throne, but it was in 1833 when he arrived at Nauplia. However, it was not extremely disadvantageous they aimed to support the building the Greek State. Alexander Mavrokordatos was a National Assembly civilian leader who supporting the mission of Orlandos and Louriottis. He became a Secretary-General of the Executive Council (1823), Greece Prime Minister (1831, 1841, 1844, 1854-5), and a President of the legislative Senate. In 1835, King Otho ruled Athens.He neglected the promised National Assembly as the basis of the Constitution despite the earnest advice of Lord Palmerston and Sir Robert Peel. As a consequence, German influence developed a feeling of discontent and led to another revolt in 1841. On 15th September 1843, the peo ple dismissed Otho due to his failure in creating a constitutional regime. Finally, Greece attained freedom from foreign domination. Its liberation brought economic and intellectual progress. For instance, the University of Athens was established in 1837, which served as the center for propagation and preservation of Hellenic culture as well as in producing competitive professions.While others were not open to transformation and new opportunities, many Greeks accepted modernization, created a Western-liberal identity, entered the commercial world, and explored the ideas of the Enlightenment and Reason. The triple alliance supported the revolution and the upbringing of the new state but it faced many challenges such as: Greek’s debt incurred during the war; the oppressive taxation that resulted to brigandage; the free press and rights to express opinion; and the disputes between the members of Council of Regency. In spite of the difficulties, the Allied Powers remained morally responsible in building the State. Synthesis Greece was under the control of the Turks during the Ottoman Empire.Greece started the revolution in 1821 and its initiative to promote peace won the sympathy of the Allied Forces that helped won the battle in 1829. The building of the newly freed State in the early 1830s, however, was ruled mostly by Russian nationals. The Allied Forces encountered oppositions and obstacles in addition to public contempt of its oppressive and unfavorable political system. It was early in 1840s that Greece was totally liberated from foreign control. It was the diaspora, which started before the revolution and continued until 1830s that led to the transformation of the Greek state. It was the time when many Greek who crossed borders became successful in their life in the West.They were recognized by other European nations because of their exceptional talents, knowledge, skills ad the ability to succeed outside their native land. Indeed, education has brou ght light and true freedom to the Greek community. Bibliography 2005. â€Å"Greece,† Architectural Science Review 8(4). Crawley, C. W. The Question of Greek Independence: A Study of British Policy in the Near East, 1821-1833. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1930. Forster, Edward S. A Short History of Modern Greece, 1821-1956. London: Methuen, 1958. Glencross, Michael, â€Å"Greece Restored: Greece and the Greek War of Independence in French Romantic Historiography 1821-1830.† Journal of European Studies 27(1) (1997). Kaloudis, George, 2006. â€Å"Greeks of the Diaspora: Modernizers or an Obstacle to Progress?. † International Journal on World Peace 23(2). Kolokotronis, Theodoros. Encyclop? dia Britannica. (2007) Encyclop? dia Britannica Online, http://www. britannica. com/eb/article-9045950. Nostos, â€Å"Greek Revolution 1821 – 1829. † nostos. com (2005), http://www. nostos. com/greekrev/ Schofield, Philip, and Jonathan Harris, eds . Legislator of the World: Writings on Codification, Law, and Education. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press, 1998. Van Steen, Gonda, 2000. Venom in Verse: Aristophanes in Modern Greece. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Immanuel Kant Essay

1 Introduction Have you ever watched a group debate an ethical decision given a particular case study with several different variations to the story? It is fascinating to watch. Some of the individuals feel so strongly about being â€Å"right† they will argue until they get their point across. Others waffle and try to look at the situation from a variety of perspectives. Given a particular Case Study based on terms of confidentiality, this paper compares the basis of morality under two alternative ethical systems — Utilitarianism and Kantianism. We will explore the theory behind each ethical system, describe the facts of the Case, and interpret a course of ethical action using both ethical systems, and the significance of this dilemma. I chose to examine the Utilitarianism and Kantianism ethical systems because at times they seem diabolically opposed based on the theoretical reasoning behind choosing a particular action. Yet, in many cases the chosen action is the same. For this particular case on confidentiality, a personal relationship attempts to complicate how to determine the morally correct action. I explore this correlation by comparing Utilitarianism and Kantianism. Utilitarianism uses a relatively straightforward cost-benefit analysis where the calculation is â€Å"indifferent to persons and relationships (Dombrowski 2000:248). † Consequently, when using a Utilitarian system to examine what ethical action is appropriate everyone is â€Å"on equal footing (Dombrowski 2000:248). † This is somewhat of a simplistic view of how individuals make decisions; however, it is a simple view that allows you to make a somewhat unbiased decision. A decision not based on â€Å"rank, status, wealth, race, gender, or personal relationship (Dombrowski 2 2000:248). â€Å"Similar to Utilitarianism, Kantianism would also negate the significance of any personal relationships. The Kantian would do unto others, as they would consent to treating you. The one universal way to act should carry from person to person regardless of your personal relationship to that person. Let us explore the similarities and differences between these two ethical theories. Next, we will take a close look at the facts of one particular Case Study where personal relationships do come into play. Then, we will compare how a Utilitarian and a Kantian might act and why. What motivates the decision-makers under each moral system? 2 Comparing Theory 2. 1 Theory: Utilitarianism 2. 1. 1 Pleasure versus Pain: Utilitarianism is a somewhat general term for a variety of perspectives that all generally fall under the guise of this theoretical stance. In any case, I will attempt to summarize the major theoretical viewpoints of this ethical system. For the most part, Utilitarianism recognizes two absolutes in the world: pain and pleasure. Moral law follows the Principle of Utility, in other words, what motivates human beings. They found that Good has priority over the Right (Justice) (Griffin 2005, personal communication) and they make ethical decisions by determining â€Å"the greatest useful goodness for the greatest number of people (Dombrowski 2000:54). † Good equals happiness (pleasure) and alternatively bad equals pain or displeasure and has no value. Utilitarianism determines the right or correct action based on a formula that shows which action results in maximized good (happiness/pleasure). Maximized good takes into account all those individuals affected by the actions under consideration. 2. 1. 2 Cost-Benefit Analysis: Utilitarianism simplifies moral law to a quantitative calculation that determines ethical choice: Total Pleasure – Total Pain = Total Utility (Griffin 2005: personal communication). Utilitarianism uses a cost-benefit analysis to decide whether we tell or do not tell. We determine what is ethically 3 correct through an objective and quantitative measure of utilitarian goodness. â€Å"measure it for the appropriate number of people, compare it to measures of ill effects for the remaining people, plug it all into an algorithm, and calculate the solution (Dombrowski 2000). † Utilitarianism, born out of the technological and scientific revolution, uses a scientific approach to ethics. Theoretically, Utilitarianism does not take into account whose happiness is at stake and the action with the highest total utility is the correct action. 2. 2 Theory: Kantianism 2. 2. 1 Sense of Duty: A sense of duty is the guiding principle to Kantian theory. Ethics does not come from a higher authority nor does it rely on the individual to weigh the competing interests of the participants in an ethical dilemma. Unlike Utilitarianism, Kant’s ethical system represents a universal categorical imperative rule of ethics. The Categorical imperative is an expression of the moral law. The imperative is the correct, right, or good action taken in a particular situation. A categorical imperative â€Å"denotes an absolute, unconditional requirement that allows no exceptions, and is both required and justified as an end in itself, not as a means to some other end; the opposite of a hypothetical imperative (www. wikipedia. org). † In Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, he outlines the Categorical Imperative in three different ways (www. wikipedia. org): 2. 2. 1. 1 Universal Law formulation: â€Å"Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. † 2. 2. 1. 2 Humanity or End in Itself formulation: â€Å"Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end. † 2. 2. 1. 3 Kingdom of Ends formulation: â€Å"All maxims as proceeding from 4 our own [hypothetical] making of law ought to harmonize with a possible kingdom of ends. † 2. 2. 2 Reason versus Happiness: Kantianism recognizes Reason, not happiness or pleasure, is the foundation of moral law. Reason is the faculty of humans, which enables us to choose the principle, or rule on which we act (Griffin 2005, personal communication). The categorical imperative is an underlying moral system based on Reason, the integral link independent of a particular context — it is universal. To understand the basis of morality (the existence of a moral law) you must look for it in the capacity for reason and not in the capacity for pleasure and pain. The very foundation of Kantianism is that you must treat people the way they would consent to you treating them the same way. Your act is universal with no contradictions. Kant considers immorality as the product of individuals trying to create a different standard for themselves compared to the rest of humanity. Immorality ignores the categorical imperative. The Right comes before the Good (happiness); in other words, there are moral constraints on what one may do to promote happiness. One has a duty to obey the moral law, and the moral law is not determined by figuring out what promotes happiness (Griffin 2005, personal communication). You cannot reduce humans to meer means — treating someone is a way in which they would not consent. 3 Case Study Facts 3. 1 Case Study Overview: â€Å"You are employed as a technical communicator by Caduceus Company, a major provider of software systems for the health care industry. Currently, you are working on help-desk instructions for a new software system that operates from a database accumulated from all the records of all the hospitals, clinics, HMOs, laboratories, and physicians in your state. These records carry a good deal of highly personal information on patients and are, of course, private and confidential. The revelation of some of this information to the wrong people could be seriously damaging for those patients. Improper release of this information could, for example, limit their employability, damage their reputations, or restrict their access to health 5 insurance at affordable rates. Part of your job, in fact is to ensure that confidentiality is maintained by all who use the system while preventing access to those who might misuse it. Just yesterday, you learned of some shocking information. While observing the typical daily operation of the help-desk staff in resolving users’ questions, you recognized the name of one of the clients called up on a screen. It is the name of your cousin’s fiance, and the entry indicates that he has tested positive for HIV and has received counseling about HIV and AIDS from a local clinic. You and your cousin are very close, and you are certain that she is unaware that her intended spouse has tested positive for HIV. The marriage is only a few weeks away. She would be highly endangered after marriage but also in their current relations without this knowledge. Do you reveal this information to your cousin but violate the privacy and confidentiality that you have sworn yourself to and are legally obliged to maintain? Or do you keep the information to yourself but jeopardize the health and life of your cousin by preserving the deception by her fiance (Dombrowsky 2000:238). † 3. 2 Choices or Ethical Action: As I understand the case, there are really only three different courses of action to choose from. 3. 2. 1 Do not say anything at all 3. 2. 2 Reveal the truth to your cousin 3. 1. 1. 2. 1 Talk to your cousin 3. 1. 1. 2. 2 Write an anonymous letter to your cousin 3. 2. 3 Confront the potential fiance 3. 1. 1. 3. 1 Talk to the fiance and explain why he needs to tell your cousin 3. 1. 1. 3. 2 Threaten fiance — if you do not tell my cousin I will tell 4 Comparing the Application between Ethical Systems 4. 1 To compare the moral significance of the above stated fact, I will look at the theory behind Utilitarianism and Kantianism to determine which action is the correct action. 4. 1. 1 Application: Utilitarianism 4. 1. 1. 1 According to Dombrowski (2000), he suggests Utilitarianism is the most reasonable ethical approach to take due to the simplistic nature of the principles of the Utilitarian moral law. However, he also recognizes how it is hard to apply measurable, objective costs to the loss of the technician’s job, professional reputation, â€Å"pain, suffering, violated trust, and a broken relationship (Dombrowski 2000:248). † In any case, I attempt to illustrate through the following Table (Table 1) what the Utilitarian application may look like. Table 1. Utilitarianism Cost-Benefit Analysis Choices TOTAL PLEASURE – TOTAL PAIN = TOTAL UTILITY 1. Do not say anything at all Keep job Cousin gets HIV and dies Cousin’s kids get HIV Cousin’s marriage dissolves Lots of pain by cousin = low utility 2. Reveal the truth to your cousin Cousin does not contract HIV and lives Lose job Company loses credibility You can not get a job Lots of pain by technical communicator but cousin does not die = medium to high utility 3. Confront the potential fiance Keep job Cousin does not contract HIV. Fiance is upset by having to discuss with cousin Happiness for technical communicator and cousin, a little pain for fiance = high utility 4. 1. 1. 2 Examining the Table, you can see I have outlined three separate 6 choices, determined the total pleasure, total pain, and total utility. I was unable to determine an objective, absolute number to measure each factor, however, I did rank the total utility by low, medium, and high. As you can see, if the technical communicator chooses not to say anything at all, she would keep her job, but her cousin would most definitely contract HIV and her cousin could die from it or one of her kids could contract the disease. In any case, the cousins’ marriage is most definitely going to dissolve once she finds out that her husband was not open with her from the beginning. Consequently, I ranked the total utility to LOW UTILITY due to the extensive pain the cousin would ultimately endure. The second choice was for the technical communicator to reveal the truth to her cousin either directly or anonymously. The pleasure obtained from this decision would result in the technical communicator’s cousin not contracting HIV and living (as a result of this situation). However, the technical communicator would probably lose her job, the company could lose its credibility and that could effect the jobs of other company employees, and the technical communicator may not be able to find another job because she breached her trust with the client and her company. The total utility, therefore, results in a lot of pain for the technical communicator. Fortunately, the cousin would not contract HIV and increase her risk of dying. Due to the nature of the utility — death versus life, I ranked this decision at MEDIUM to HIHGH UTILITY because the cousin would experience a great deal of happiness that would far exceed the unequal but opposite pain of the technical communicator. The third choice, confront the potential fiance, would result in 7 pleasure for the technical communicator because she could keep her job. In addition, the cousin is able to protect herself from contracting HIV. In contrast, the fiance would be upset by having to discuss this difficult issue with his new wife. Due to these circumstances, I ranked this choice as having VERY HIGH UTILITY. The technical communicator is happy, keeps her job, and does not lose her cousin. Her cousin does not contract a life threatening disease. Yet, the fiance experiences discomfort with having to discuss this relatively important issue with his new wife. Consequently, a Utilitarianist would find this last choice to be the best and most ethically correct choice. Dombrowski (pg. 248) points out how difficult it is to reduce this case to a simple cost-benefit utility analysis for a number of reasons. Yet, the most poignant reason is the inability to neutralize the scenario and avoid the personal relationship the technician has with her cousin. Theoretically, the entire cost-benefit ratio should be the same no matter the personal relationship. However, I suspect your ethical action would tilt in a different direction should your motivations be driven by the patient’s partner. If you do not know the patient’s partner why would you risk your job, home life, and economic security for someone you do not even know. Is it really for the greater good? If so, why not find out everyone who has AIDS and post it on street corners? I am baffled by this strict compliance with the Utilitarian perspective. 4. 1. 2 Application: Kant 4. 1. 2. 1 Kant would argue that we â€Å"should act as we would expect others to act toward us and in way that should have universal applicability (pg. 247). † You must treat people the way they would consent to you treating them the same way. Given that this decision could 8 result in a life-threatening situation, Dombrowski argues that of course the cousin would want to know and would consent to treating them the same way. Dombrowski suggests that this is quite probably a universal ethical law. Yet, Dombrowski also recognizes that â€Å"most people probably would agree that the seriousness of the stakes so heavily tip the ethical scales against the side of blind compliance with the law that the ethical judgement to disclose should be binding on all people in such situations (pg.247). † In this interpretation, the seriousness and/or life threatening properties of the case motivate the Kantian. This interpretation suggests that the Kantian is obligated to the cousin and not to the patient — not because the cousin is a relative or has a special personal relationship to the technician. The technician is obligated to the moral universal law and would tell anyone should they find out. However, Kantian Moral law also says a promise should be kept. So then, the technician’s promise to her profession could take precedence over what appears to be the obvious categorical imperative. Kant might also agree with an ethical course of action where the technician approaches the potential fiance and makes it clear that if he does not tell, she will tell her cousin. In this variation, the categorical imperative recognizes that revealing this information to the cousin is in clear violation with the law. By approaching the potential fiance it also reduces the possible consequences because the outcome will ultimately result in your cousin finding out — but not through you. As a result, the Kantian does not violate the law but also does what is ethically correct. 9 5 Conclusion To summarize, Utilitarianism is an ethical system that proposes that â€Å"the greatest useful goodness for the greatest number of people† should be our guiding principle when making ethical decisions. In contrast, Kantianism suggests that the morally correct action is † an absolute, unconditional requirement that allows no exceptions, and is both required and justified as an end in itself, not as a means to some other end (www. wikipedia. org). † In the Case of Confidentiality, both Utilitarianism and Kantianism found that the best and most correct choice was to confront the fiance. In this scenario, â€Å"the presumed authority for methods & solutions is the profession meaning that personal ethics & religion do not have prima facie authority. † Yet, for the Kantian I think it is hard to figure out how to prioritize the relationships between competing duties (expression of law) — professional promise versus an individual ethics. I also wonder how your promise to your family to protect them and keep them safe plays into this account. However, the Utilitarianism cost-benefit analysis revealed how this ethical tradition takes into account all who are affected by the actions under consideration. As for the Kantian conclusion, the choice represented a universal expression of moral law. In both cases, the personal relationship did not and should not come into play as a significant fact. But I wonder, how this could possibly ever be the case. REFERENCES 2000 Dombrowski, Paul. Ethics in Technical Communication. The Allyn & Bacon Series in Technical Communication: Boston & London. 2005 Griffin, Chris (friendly neighbor Professor of Philosophy). Gratefully summarized Utilitarianism and Kantianism one night at the dinner table. 2005 www. wikipedia. org. Discussions posted on July 25, 2005. 10.

Introduction to Negotiation

Introduction to Negotiation Negotiation is and activity that every individual caries out in his everyday life. We are constantly negotiation with ourselves, our family, friends, business, etc. Every activity that happens is the result of a negotiation – â€Å"Pros and Cons†. And thus negotiation can be defined as; â€Å"The means by which people deal with their differences† Negotiation is a continuous and an evolving process especially in a supply chain environment. A company cannot meet the expectation of its customers or shareholders single handed and thus there is lot of negotiation is involved and it is a continuous process.It is a process that emerges when there is a difference and it cannot be settled single handed without a negotiation. Negotiation is not necessarily a win-loose process, but a good negotiation process is where both parties accept a mutually beneficial or amicable solution. A Negotiation can be distributive or integrative depending on how i t been conducted. A negotiation which involves hard bargaining and is mostly concentrated on one topic where usually the winner takes all is a distributive negotiation. There is little or no attention paid to relationship, consideration or sharing of information and are very aggressive.On the contrary an integrative negotiation is a process in which all parties cooperate to maximize the benefit to all parties and is commonly referred to as expanding the pie. There is lot of understanding among the parties and importance is paid to how more value can be generated in a continuing partnership. Sometimes depending on the topic a negotiation can get very complex. It could get into a Multi Phase Negotiation stage where one negotiation could lead into another negotiation with the complexity increasing at each stage.It could also get into a Multiparty Negotiation where the needs and want of other parties will require to be explored and will be included into further negotiations. Though ther e are many types or causes of negotiation, it is always important for an effective negotiation to underline once BATNA (Best Alternative To A Negotiated Agreement) and their Reservation Point. A BATNA is something which every negotiator should have, and is completely under his control. With this he should be able to set up his reservation point, something beyond which he should not negotiate.Once these are clearly understood and negotiated up on, we can at most of the time identify the ZOPA (Zone of Potential Agreement), which in most of the times overlaps both parties’ reservation points. Apart from the above other main elements that plays an important role in a negotiation and the most important is listening. Both parties should pay attention, listen and acknowledge the other parties BATNA and Reservation Points. This will not only improve relationships and achieve in establishing a ZOPA, but could also be beneficial to other departments or other entities that could have c onnection with your unit or industry.There should also be lot of preparation involved prior to a negotiation and preparation should focus on all areas. While a negotiation can be very effective, it could have several barriers. Therefore it is always important that some level of effort is put in in prior and during the negotiation. It is important to respect all parties and acknowledge their interests and concerns. Finding areas of common interests and sharing same, providing a comfort zone for negotiation, talking about past experiences, etc. , are some of the few ways to unwind before going into a negotiation process directly.Similarly it is important that during negotiation a process is clearly followed. The point around which discussion is taking places is well identifies and not deviated from and a clear time line is established. It is also important that the right persons are involved during the negotiation and the points negotiated upon is justifiable There should be room for flexibility all barriers like lack of trust, excessive bargaining, being reluctant to share information, structural impediments in putting inappropriate people at the discussion, cultural and gender difference any inds of spoilers should not be used and the language used should be simple and understanding to all parties. Mental barriers like Escalation, Partisan Perception, Irrational Expectation, Override confidence caused by ego, having shifting BATNA, not having a clear breakpoint, not understanding the other person, not sharing problem and understanding viewpoint, feeling invincible, etc. and should not be used during a negotiation process. While there are no rights or wrongs, style also matters in a negotiation. This often reflects on the kind of person one is always best to consider how to proceed.There are 5 different styles and each can be detailed as below; Avoiding style is when you hates conflicts and try to avoid them at all cost. It is often associated with trying to wi thdraw from situation or try to pass the decision to someone else and hence very difficult to arrive at a conclusion. This kind of style can be used if the issue, relationship, decision is of less importance, but can cause problems if the relationship or issue is of importance. Using this too often can have a negative feeling. Accommodating is when trying to use relationship to solve a conflict.On the contrary if the other person is not accommodating and takes advantage there is nothing returned in the negotiation process a negotiation can be accommodating when no much importance is paid to the issue or when there are not arguments on one’s side of the table. This can often create problem if the outcome is going to be shared at it could show that other are taking advantage of your position. Competing is like trying to win and take control of the situation or considers a negotiation as wining and loosing.There is no attempt made on collaboration, or cooperation from others and if used often shall loose self-respect eventually. A competing strategy can be during a negotiation if there is an emergency and a decision is imminent. It could also be that one side is confident that they are right and have all the supporting’s and the situation is under their control Compromising negotiation often tries to find something amicable. This often results in giving and taking with moderate satisfaction to both parties. This could create problem while negotiation on very creative problem and could be used the working together s important with limited resources A good solution is often considered as a bottleneck and any collaboration is considered as forcing something on. Collaborating is more a problem solving style of negotiating. They are very imaginative who think about win-win situation and thing of expanding the pie. Issues and relationship are both given importance along with being cooperative and creative. All concerns are well addressed and as a result w ill not be able to exercise if time frame is too short. It is also not applicable the issues are trivial or no much preparation or rehearsing time.A negotiation can also be different when negotiation for yourself or for others. When negotiation for yourself you often tend to negotiate what is most beneficial to your whereas on the other hand when negotiation for a third party there is often a personal gain side that is looked at especially is cases where negotiating for a property via a real estate agent. However a third party negotiator can bring with him lots of experience that could also be very beneficial and will assist in a negotiation process. Thus for a negotiation it is important to understand one own style and to determine the other persons style as well.This will avoid unpleasant surprises during a negotiation. and will assist in the effective preparation of BATNA and reservation points We can thus understand that the process of negotiation is continuous and needs to be c onstantly improved. It is a process that needs to be understood and required to be planned and monitored using various strategies and resources. As part of continuous improvement it is important to create a process, train all participants to follow and monitor the process. This process can be improved by learning and summarizing from reflection after a negotiation.It is also important to consider that every negotiation must have a preparation process where goals and expectation are clarified. A clear BATNA have to be defined which everyone in the team is well aware off. Any smart suggestions need to be recognized and suitably rewarded. Develop a process that works best for oneself and use it to evaluate what works best and willingness to follow the process. And the most important to remember that all negotiations cannot be won and not to be abandon just because we are not able to achieve what we perceived. Introduction to Negotiation Introduction to Negotiation Negotiation is and activity that every individual caries out in his everyday life. We are constantly negotiation with ourselves, our family, friends, business, etc. Every activity that happens is the result of a negotiation – â€Å"Pros and Cons†. And thus negotiation can be defined as; â€Å"The means by which people deal with their differences† Negotiation is a continuous and an evolving process especially in a supply chain environment. A company cannot meet the expectation of its customers or shareholders single handed and thus there is lot of negotiation is involved and it is a continuous process.It is a process that emerges when there is a difference and it cannot be settled single handed without a negotiation. Negotiation is not necessarily a win-loose process, but a good negotiation process is where both parties accept a mutually beneficial or amicable solution. A Negotiation can be distributive or integrative depending on how i t been conducted. A negotiation which involves hard bargaining and is mostly concentrated on one topic where usually the winner takes all is a distributive negotiation. There is little or no attention paid to relationship, consideration or sharing of information and are very aggressive.On the contrary an integrative negotiation is a process in which all parties cooperate to maximize the benefit to all parties and is commonly referred to as expanding the pie. There is lot of understanding among the parties and importance is paid to how more value can be generated in a continuing partnership. Sometimes depending on the topic a negotiation can get very complex. It could get into a Multi Phase Negotiation stage where one negotiation could lead into another negotiation with the complexity increasing at each stage.It could also get into a Multiparty Negotiation where the needs and want of other parties will require to be explored and will be included into further negotiations. Though ther e are many types or causes of negotiation, it is always important for an effective negotiation to underline once BATNA (Best Alternative To A Negotiated Agreement) and their Reservation Point. A BATNA is something which every negotiator should have, and is completely under his control. With this he should be able to set up his reservation point, something beyond which he should not negotiate.Once these are clearly understood and negotiated up on, we can at most of the time identify the ZOPA (Zone of Potential Agreement), which in most of the times overlaps both parties’ reservation points. Apart from the above other main elements that plays an important role in a negotiation and the most important is listening. Both parties should pay attention, listen and acknowledge the other parties BATNA and Reservation Points. This will not only improve relationships and achieve in establishing a ZOPA, but could also be beneficial to other departments or other entities that could have c onnection with your unit or industry.There should also be lot of preparation involved prior to a negotiation and preparation should focus on all areas. While a negotiation can be very effective, it could have several barriers. Therefore it is always important that some level of effort is put in in prior and during the negotiation. It is important to respect all parties and acknowledge their interests and concerns. Finding areas of common interests and sharing same, providing a comfort zone for negotiation, talking about past experiences, etc. , are some of the few ways to unwind before going into a negotiation process directly.Similarly it is important that during negotiation a process is clearly followed. The point around which discussion is taking places is well identifies and not deviated from and a clear time line is established. It is also important that the right persons are involved during the negotiation and the points negotiated upon is justifiable There should be room for flexibility all barriers like lack of trust, excessive bargaining, being reluctant to share information, structural impediments in putting inappropriate people at the discussion, cultural and gender difference any inds of spoilers should not be used and the language used should be simple and understanding to all parties. Mental barriers like Escalation, Partisan Perception, Irrational Expectation, Override confidence caused by ego, having shifting BATNA, not having a clear breakpoint, not understanding the other person, not sharing problem and understanding viewpoint, feeling invincible, etc. and should not be used during a negotiation process. While there are no rights or wrongs, style also matters in a negotiation. This often reflects on the kind of person one is always best to consider how to proceed.There are 5 different styles and each can be detailed as below; Avoiding style is when you hates conflicts and try to avoid them at all cost. It is often associated with trying to wi thdraw from situation or try to pass the decision to someone else and hence very difficult to arrive at a conclusion. This kind of style can be used if the issue, relationship, decision is of less importance, but can cause problems if the relationship or issue is of importance. Using this too often can have a negative feeling. Accommodating is when trying to use relationship to solve a conflict.On the contrary if the other person is not accommodating and takes advantage there is nothing returned in the negotiation process a negotiation can be accommodating when no much importance is paid to the issue or when there are not arguments on one’s side of the table. This can often create problem if the outcome is going to be shared at it could show that other are taking advantage of your position. Competing is like trying to win and take control of the situation or considers a negotiation as wining and loosing.There is no attempt made on collaboration, or cooperation from others and if used often shall loose self-respect eventually. A competing strategy can be during a negotiation if there is an emergency and a decision is imminent. It could also be that one side is confident that they are right and have all the supporting’s and the situation is under their control Compromising negotiation often tries to find something amicable. This often results in giving and taking with moderate satisfaction to both parties. This could create problem while negotiation on very creative problem and could be used the working together s important with limited resources A good solution is often considered as a bottleneck and any collaboration is considered as forcing something on. Collaborating is more a problem solving style of negotiating. They are very imaginative who think about win-win situation and thing of expanding the pie. Issues and relationship are both given importance along with being cooperative and creative. All concerns are well addressed and as a result w ill not be able to exercise if time frame is too short. It is also not applicable the issues are trivial or no much preparation or rehearsing time.A negotiation can also be different when negotiation for yourself or for others. When negotiation for yourself you often tend to negotiate what is most beneficial to your whereas on the other hand when negotiation for a third party there is often a personal gain side that is looked at especially is cases where negotiating for a property via a real estate agent. However a third party negotiator can bring with him lots of experience that could also be very beneficial and will assist in a negotiation process. Thus for a negotiation it is important to understand one own style and to determine the other persons style as well.This will avoid unpleasant surprises during a negotiation. and will assist in the effective preparation of BATNA and reservation points We can thus understand that the process of negotiation is continuous and needs to be c onstantly improved. It is a process that needs to be understood and required to be planned and monitored using various strategies and resources. As part of continuous improvement it is important to create a process, train all participants to follow and monitor the process. This process can be improved by learning and summarizing from reflection after a negotiation.It is also important to consider that every negotiation must have a preparation process where goals and expectation are clarified. A clear BATNA have to be defined which everyone in the team is well aware off. Any smart suggestions need to be recognized and suitably rewarded. Develop a process that works best for oneself and use it to evaluate what works best and willingness to follow the process. And the most important to remember that all negotiations cannot be won and not to be abandon just because we are not able to achieve what we perceived.