Trophic Cascade Essay Example

Essays on Trophic Cascade Essay The paper "Trophic Cascade" is an outstanding example of an essay on environmental studies. A trophic cascade is a profound concept relating to ecology. It begins at the top of the food chain and goes all the way to the bottom. An example is when wolves were introduced in Yellowstone National Park in 1995 because wolves often kill other species in order to eat them and those species have eaten other species that are smaller than them. It is all in regards to the food chain and the roles of predator and prey. However, they also give life to many others.   The number of deer increasing before 1995 occurred in Yellowstone National Park because wolves had been out of that habitat for over 70 years. The deer had continued to reproduce and there were not enough other species above them on the food chain. Because of this, the population of the deer increased and they had eaten much of the vegetation. The wolves killed some of the deer but then also changed the behavior of the deer and the places that had lost vegetation started to revive because the wolves had changed them out of that area. The bears also began to kill the baby deer. The wolves changed the course of the river because there was less erosion. More pools formed. The regenerated forest helped to stabilize the banks of the rivers so that there was less erosion and did not collapse. Because of this, the flow of the river was much more on its steady course. The following is a food web of Yellowstone National Park. It includes the roles of each species after the wolves were release d back into the park after 70 years. In order to stabilize the ecosystem in the UAE, wild hyenas were reintroduced. The rare animal was endangered and one female was found on Sir Bani Yas Island. Seeing the female had a young litter, it was obvious that there was a male too though it was not found. The young were raised in captivity. They were then relocated back to the island in 2008 in order to control the population of antelopes and gazelles because the other top predator on the island was the cheetah. Hyenas feed on the carcasses too so if there happened to be an antelope or gazelle that had fallen sick, the hyenas would be able to prey on these animals and continue to keep the population healthy by eliminating the sick animals from the island.

What Does Clifford Consider to Be the Appropriate Ethical Norm free essay sample

I agree with Clifford’s’ evidentialist view to a point, as in theory it is a good one, however, practically I believe it is not a realistic way to live your life, as it would be near impossible to find time to investigate and sufficient evidence on which to base every single belief that you come across in your life. Evidentialism states that the justification for a belief is based entirely on the evidence supporting that belief, therefore defining the epistemic condition of a belief. This can be summarised by the simple thesis â€Å"For all persons S and propositions p and times t, S ought to believe that p at t if and only if believing p fits Ss evidence at t. † Clifford’s evidentialist principle is extremely similar to this thesis, as the main point of his argument is that â€Å"it is wrong always, everywhere and for anyone to believe anything on insufficient evidence† . From this we can see that he believed that sufficient reason and evidence supports a belief and if counterbalanced then one should withhold assent to that belief, rather than risk believing something based upon inadequate information. One aspect that Clifford emphasises more than the ordinary evidentialist thesis does is the severity of the consequence toward the believer of a false belief, as he uses words such as ‘guilty’ and ‘sin’ to describe the transgressions of these dishonourable men whose judgement was not to be trusted. He places importance on challenging beliefs indoctrinated in you from childhood, instead of neglecting doubts and avoiding educating yourself on the opposition of these beliefs- stating that if you do not do so â€Å"the life of that man is one long sin against mankind†. Another important point that he raises is the repercussions that your ‘false’ beliefs can have on mankind, not only the important decisions made by people in positions of power that obviously and directly affect others, such as the two examples given in The Ethics of Belief; but also the small and seemingly insignificant beliefs made by every man, as he expresses that â€Å"every time we let ourselves believe for unworthy reasons, we weaken our powers of self-control, of doubting, of judicially and fairly weighing evidence† the results of this will be a greater, ethical wrong toward society- â€Å"the danger to society is not merely that it should believe wrong things, though that is great enough; but that it should become credulous, and lose the habit of testing things and inquiring into them; for then it must sink back into savagery. The first example that Clifford provides in The Ethics of Belief is one of a certain ship-owner who sold tickets to emigrant families for a transatlantic voyage. The ship was fairly old and had needed repairs in the past but instead of overhauling and refitting the ship, the owner chose to rather save the money and send the ship to sea with the belief that it would be safe and seaworthy. In Cliffo rd’s story the ship sinks and the ship-owner collects the insurance money without any further consequences. Clifford (who himself once survived a shipwreck, and so must have found this behaviour particularly loathsome ) argues that, although the man had convinced himself that no harm would come to the passengers and was sincere in this conviction, it was a result of him suppressing doubts raised about the seaworthiness of the ship and was not based on investigative evidence. Therefore Clifford states that even if the ship had not sunk, the man would still be guilty, as his belief would still have been a false one, even if it had not resulted in the death of many people. The second example that is used is one of a group of men who lay false charges against a group of citizens, accusing them of harmful religious practices and resulting in a Commision being appointed to investigate the claims. It was found that the accused were in fact innocent, something that the accusers could have seen had they investigated the matter themselves. In this example, Clifford emphasises how wrong the beliefs of these men were- although they honestly believed them to be true- as these beliefs were founded on a suspicion and not sufficient evidence. As he does with his first example, Clifford suggests that had the results of the enquiry been different, and the accused been found guilty, it would in no way validate the beliefs of the accusers, as the belief would still be an unjustified one, giving them no right to believe their accusations. In this argument we must also consider the difference between an epistemic and ethical wrong as Clifford is arguing the ethical norm regulating belief formation. Ethical norms are the unofficial rules or laws determined and constructed by the cultural power of a society and often have a moral connotation. Epistemic means â€Å"of, or relating to knowledge† and an epistemic wrong is when something ‘violates an epistemic principle not overridden by any other epistemic principle’ whereas an ethical wrong is more of a breach of morality and the principles between what is ‘right’ and ‘wrong’. An example of an epistemic wrong would be â€Å"accepting some proposition on the basis of false, irrelevant or insufficient evidence† , which is one of the main points of Clifford’s argument. An example of an ethical wrong would be to give false information to customers in order to benefit financially. There are three negative consequences for ethical wrongs- ‘the tie to action, the generational wrong and bad habits’ the first deals with the negative results that moral failings can have on the actions of the believer; the second deals with the social dimension of these ethical wrongs which can be inherited by other generations and thus lead to a downward spiral of society along with the third, in which the bad habit of supporting a belief for unworthy reason will create a world in which no-one challenges anything and everything is taken at face value. Clifford argues not only the epistemic importance of inquiring into the validity of all of your beliefs but also the ethical importance in challenging everything. He states that â€Å"we all suffer severely enough from the maintenance and support of false beliefs and the fatally wrong actions which they lead to, and the evil born when one such belief is entertained is great and wide. As a counterargument to Clifford’s Ethics of Belief, a fellow philosopher, William James, wrote The Will to Believe, challenging some of Clifford’s points and I believe that his arguments are valid and provide more of a logical way of looking at belief and the appropriate ethical norm toward belief maintenance. James argues that â€Å"first of all some issues are alive or dead for a person, like live or dead wires for an electrician† meaning that to some, certain choices where two options are provided and neither are acceptable when relating to the believers personal situation are not valid choices, â€Å"secondly, some decisions are forced or avoidable† , such as choosing to turn left or right in your car when getting to a T junction in the road, which is forced, or deciding which ovie to watch- which is avoidable, as you could chose not to watch a movie- â€Å"thirdly some are momentous or trivial† and therefore your decision could be one that would either have a significant effect on the history of the world or the lives of others, such as approving nuclear warfare, or could be a menial choice such as what to eat for lunch. â€Å"Now when Clifford negates all belief without evidence in order to avoid error, he does not recognize that some decisions are forced and mo mentous. Not to make a decision is to make a decision in such a case. Not to choose an option brings about the same loss of the truth or good that could have been experienced. † From this we can see that selection for beliefs is more complicated than it may initially appear in Clifford’s argument and not as simple as just believing anything that has sufficient evidence to support your belief in it. For instance, in some cases one can never have absolute certainty of ones evidence and this makes it fairly difficult to decide when one’s evidence is sufficient or insufficient. Also, an ethical norm is decided on the basis of your moral compass and thus this is very much an instinctual decision, not one made based upon epistemology or knowledge, and this is supported better in James’s argument as he states that â€Å"our passional nature not only lawfully may, but must decide an option between propositions whenever it is a genuine option that cannot by its nature be decided on intellectual grounds† as opposed to Clifford who states that with patient investigation you can find the appropriate evidence on which to assent or dissent to that belief. In conclusion, I believe Clifford’s Ethics of Belief is a valuable insight into an argument that should be seriously taken into consideration when dealing with both the epistemic and ethical norms surrounding formation and preservation of beliefs, especially if those beliefs are significant ones that could have an impact on the course of your or other people’s life. However, I also feel that it is necessary to take into consideration that as beliefs are often a moral issue the choice to believe can be an emotional as opposed to intellectual one. James provides for this impulsiveness in his argument and allows for a less rigid standpoint in regards to the evidence required to provide someone with the right to a belief. Considering both the view of Clifford and of James I feel that one of the common points recognisable in each is the importance of belief and that instead of taking our beliefs for granted we should truly appreciate and make the most of the opportunity given to us when we are allowed the freedom to choose what we truly believe to be true.

Russell and Lenores Essays Comparison

Essays are a means by which many people have expressed their ideas on a host of issues. It is a means also that affords criticisms for leaderships and governments without necessarily engaging in unlawful acts. It is a means of communication that has been in existence ever since man had evolved to the capacity that he would communicate via writing (Greetham 67). Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Russell and Lenore’s Essays Comparison specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More This paper considers different issues that are presented in two essays by different authors as a critique and a study of the central themes in them. For this paper, the essays that will be considered have been written by Russell Sanders and the other one has been written by Keeshig-Tobias where the humanistic perspective of manhood and womanhood and the relationships between and among them will be of interest in explaining how these genders inter act as discussed by these authors in their respective essays. The essence of manhood is treated differently by Russell Sanders and Lenore Keeshig-Tobias in their essays dubbed The Men we Carry in Our Minds and He was a Boxer respectively. The two writers examine the role of a man in different contexts. These include male to female relationships in a family perspective, the power dynamics between men and women in different social settings, societal expectations of a man and the challenges of living up to those expectations. The role of man’s physical strength is contextually treated differently by Russell Sanders and Lenore Keeshig-Tobias. In Russell’s world, the man’s physical strength is used to advance the family’s economic security. However it is at the cost of his own physical health and emotional wellbeing. He works long hours exposed to elements of weather by having to carry heavy loads and stand for long hours often sustaining physical injuries. I n the evenings and weekends he toils on his land and mends broken roofs (Kay et al. 34). On the other hand, the women work at their own pace in a better environment. They cultivate their social lives around the different errands they have to run. Russell perceives the work dynamics to be in favor of the women. He says he would rather hold a baby that work at the machines. On the other hand, in Lenore’s world, the man’s physical strength has being used to the detriment of the family’s emotional security. Lenore’s father a boxer uses his physical strength and boxing prowess to intimidate the women in his life. There is insecurity as both the mother and daughter as they cower at the sight of him (Kay et al. 335). Russell wants to run from the roles and the expectations of manhood in his poor social setting. He finds the women’s world to be more comfortable and he dreads growing up to these manly roles in his society. He is caught between the two ideas of men in his social setups; the worriers and the toilers. Advertising Looking for essay on gender studies? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The toilers work all the day long at the tiresome manual labor while the worriers work preparing them for war and eventual death. He doesn’t envy any on the roles. In contrast to Russell gender roles discordance, Lenore Keeshig-Tobias embraces the manly role and the societal expectations of the same. This comes as surprising. Her drunkard father had often terrorized her and her mother (Kay et al. 390). Yet she makes excuses for him arguing that her mother must have had something to do with it. She hypothesizes that he is doing right. She enrolls for boxing classes in a bid to understand his world. We see that Russell is running way from his duties as a man out of understanding of what awaits him. However Lenore is embracing the masculine world in order to understand her father an d the world that he has forced her to live in. The men in Russell’s and Lenore’s world confront manhood challenges in different ways. The failure to provide for one’s family is seen as a man’s failure in Russell’s world (Kay et al. 378). The men prevent this by working in deplorable conditions to earn a living. When they get home they work even more to mend broken roofs and till their own land. They confront the challenges through physical work. In Lenore’s world the men run away from their challenges. Lenore’s father is driven into boxing and alcoholisms by the family strains. This explains his tantrums and physical abuse of his wife (Kay et al. 473). Lenore Keeshi-Tobia’s father never graduated from college. This makes him ill prepared to confront the different family challenges that he is undergoing leading him to alcoholism. On the other hand education opens Russell’s eyes to the different dimensions of manhood. His perspectives had been limited to the manual laborers and their bosses. Though television and encounter with male teachers he is exposed to men who work with their brains; the lawyers, the politicians etcetera. He has a change of heart from wanting to hold babies to become this kind of man. His female college-mates challenge him further on the gender roles (Kay et al. 287). He is exposed to the comfort and power of men in a higher social setting. The balance of power and comfort contrast to those of his social setup. In this set up the balance is titled in favor of men.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Russell and Lenore’s Essays Comparison specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Man to man relationship is treated differently in both works of Russell and Lenore. Lenore discusses his father taking his family problems to the boxing ring. This is often to the detriment of his male boxing opponents (Greetham 145). H is driving force are personal and in contrast to the sportsmanship spirit. On the other hand Russell examines the racial relationship between the black male convicts and the white male guards. The convicts are painted as miserable and working in deplorable condition. The guards are painted as being powerful. The bonnets of their guns are said to shine in the sun (Kay et al. 512). While the man in Lenore’s world is using his boxing prowess to dominate over his fellow man, in Russell’s world he is using the gun. In both Russell and Lenore’s essays we find that man is often a victim of his social economic circumstances in his different social setting. The drive, attitude and perceptions of his acts can be digested form those perspectives. While the intensity of the man’s act may vary from man to man, they are often dictated by his environment (Greetham 145). Works Cited Greetham, Bryan. How to Write Better Essays. 2nd Ed. Cambridge: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. Kay et al. Essay Writing for Canadian Students with Readings. 6th Ed. Toronto ON: Pearson Education Canada, 2007. This essay on Russell and Lenore’s Essays Comparison was written and submitted by user Arthur M. to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.

The eNotes Blog How To Be Successful at a LargeUniversity

How To Be Successful at a LargeUniversity Success: The accomplishment of an aim or purpose (Merriam-Webster).   Success is what every person should strive to reach every day.   It is the backbone and motivator for all of our wants and needs.   Achieving success in college requires hard work and a little bit of knowledge about how to beat the system.   The university system differs from high school in a plethora of ways.   You dont have the same classes every day, there are up to 500 students in your classes, there is no mandatory attendance, and your grade can be based on your performance on one or two tests.   If you just graduated from high school and are about to begin college, or are already in college and have a newfound resolve for success, read on to discover how to be successful at a large university. 1. Define your success.   What are you looking to get out of college?   Is this just the next step in your educational journey?   Do you plan on using it as a stepping stone to a particular job or graduate program?   Do you just want to have fun?   Knowing what you want to get out of college before you begin is important.   Perhaps you want to make a difference on campus and run for a position on student government.   If you want a strong sense of fulfillment, giving back to the community and volunteering can get you there.   I was recruited at UCLA to play baseball, so my goal was to be as successful as I could in the classroom and on the field. 2. Plan.   Where are you going after college?   This can have a tremendous impact on your collegiate educational journey.   If you plan on attending some form of post-undergraduate education, you will need to get top marks in order to be accepted into a quality program.   If you have a specific job or career path in mind, apply to a major that will help get you there.   If you arent sure what you want to do, sample a wide variety of electives and general education classes.   Communications and English degrees are highly valuable degrees that appeal to employers because they accentuate your written and verbal skills.   I had no idea what I wanted to do after college, so after my freshman year I applied as a communication studies major because of the fascinating classes and competitiveness of the program. 3. Do your research.   Think of the phrase, work smart, not hard.   Although you will probably have to do both.   Find classes that interest you.   Read the course descriptions from your schools registrar.   Talk to other students and use websites such as ratemyprofessors.com to discover what your potential professors are like.   If a high GPA is more important to you, sign up for the easy classes.   I always tried to find manageable classes that had stimulating enough subject material to keep me wanting more. 4. Show up.   No, attendance is not mandatory at large universities.   You will have huge classes in a giant auditorium and the professor and TAs will never know if you dont show up.   But if you care about getting something out of your education and earning a good grade, then spending the couple hours per week in that class is the best way to learn.   It gets you outside and in contact with your friends as well.   Dont rely on Powerpoints or Podcasts from home.   Youre likely to procrastinate on reviewing them, and they arent as affective.   Its also important to know the classes that you  must  show up for, and recognize those that you can skip every once in a while when necessary. 5. Make a good first impression.   Be aware of the power of first impressions, and realize that your first interaction with a professor or TA can be impactful in the lasting conclusions they draw about you.   Although professors try to grade tests and assignments objectively, there is no doubt that at least sometimes they give preferential treatment to students they like.   Could you really blame them if they were stricter on a student who was constantly late, didnt participate, and didnt pay attention?   So dress nicely, sit in the front of class, participate during discussion, know what youre talking about, and perhaps even visit their office hours to talk about the class and their research.   People like to talk about themselves. 6. Focus.   Dont go to lecture just to go to lecture.   If youre going to sleep, talk to friends on Facebook, or play internet games, just stay at home.   You wont get anything out of class, and you wont do as well at playing Bloons Tower Defense (my favorite game to play in class) or whatever youre doing.   When class is over, go home and review your notes for ten minutes.   The material will be fresh on your mind, and looking it over again will solidify your understanding of important concepts.   I always viewed this as time spent studying for midterms and finals way in advance.   If you spent ten minutes reviewing your notes twice a week for ten weeks, you have already studied over three hours for your final, and probably only need to study two or three more hours to be adequately prepared.   This step is the key to academic achievement. 7.   Get the easy credit.   Know the grading rubric for each of your classes.   If attendance is 10% of your grade, you better show up and get all of that 10%.   If easy homework assignments make up any portion of your grade, be organized enough to turn in every one.   Lose points on the hard stuffmidterms, finals, and papers. 8. Utilize your TAs for the hard stuff.  Ã‚  A  Teaching Assistants primary concern is the academic research he or she is pursuing as a Masters or Ph.D. student.   However, most of them are   open to help their students outside of discussion sections, as long as you are respectful of their time.   For ALL assigned essays, check your topic and thesis with the TA!   This guarantees that you will at least get a B- on the assignment.   As long as you are writing about something that is important, on topic, or interesting and you have an argument that is important, on topic, or interesting then your paper will be at least decent no matter what you write for your supporting details and commentary.   This requires intense periods of deep thinking, but ensures a good start. 9. Build relationships.   If you are worried about academic anonymity, make an effort to expose yourself to your professors.   Go to office hours, participate in class, and offer to volunteer in assisting with their research.   Professors at research universities were hired for one reason: to conduct experiments under the name of that institution.   Any help you give your professors is likely to be reciprocated, whether in the form of a good grade in that class or as a valuable reference down the road. 10. Be comfortable outside of class.   College can be stressful.   Its easy to get tied up in all of your homework and independence.   A healthy social life and saving some time to unwind with friends takes the load off and helps you acclamate to your new environment.   Working out and staying physically fit can increase your self-confidence and enhance your mood to keep you happy 🙂

The Invisible Hand of The Market

The Invisible Hand of The Market Invisible hand is the term first introduced by Adam Smith and it refers to the balancing force that creates mutually beneficial exchange for everyone. The invisible hand is a term attributed to the 18th-century economist Adam Smith and appears in his landmark 1776 book, The Wealth of Nations. The term developed from Smith’s study of another classical economist, Richard Cantillon, and was used metaphorically by Smith to describe the â€Å"natural forces† that drive free markets, a kind of product the human nature of people interacting in the market. The term only appears twice in Smith’s book (he had used it in an earlier work in 1759, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, but in a philosophical rather than economic context), but has grown to be cited, and often misinterpreted, as one of Smith’s most important concepts. What is the Invisible Hand? In a free, unregulated market, competition for scarce resources encourages market participants to act to maximize their self-interest. â€Å"Maximizing self-interest† is a typical economic textbook term that is often not clearly explained, probably because it sounds a little more dignified than â€Å"seeking to purchase resources at the lowest or most efficient costs, and seeking to sell goods, services, or assets for the highest obtainable profit.† Even though no one is acting for the benefit of anyone else, the self-interests balance each other, creating a mutually beneficial exchange for everyone. This â€Å"balancing force† is what Adam Smith metaphorically called the â€Å"invisible hand†. WHAT IS FIAT MONEY? In simple terms, if consumers and producers are both free to look out for the own interests, an equilibrium will be created. Consumers generate demand for goods, and producers respond by developing efficient production and distribution methods to meet the demand at the lowest possible cost; prices are regulated by competition, which is in turn created by the consumer demand. Society benefits as a whole, because as prices decrease due to competitive pressure and greater efficiency, volume increases; this obliges producers to pay more for labor to keep up with demand, which increases costs and prices, which are canceled out by the higher purchasing power of the now better-paid worker/consumers. Everyone gets what they want in increasing amounts, and no one has to worry about anything other than their own needs and desires. Misinterpretation and Controversy The idea of the â€Å"invisible hand† is popular with Objectivists and adherents of the Ayn Rand philosophy of â€Å"every man for himself†, but interestingly, the term in modern usage is applied to a section of Smith’s Wealth of Nations where it does not even appear. The idea that self-interested competition leads to larger social benefits appears early in the book, in Book I, Chapter 7, but the actual phrase â€Å"invisible hand† does not appear until Book IV, Chapter 4 in the following passage: â€Å"By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention.† The idea that Smith expresses – that individual ambition has greater benefits – is a common theme throughout The Wealth of Nations, but the way Smith uses the metaphor of the â€Å"invisible hand† specifically refers to domestic versus foreign industry. Because the metaphor is consistent with Smith’s philosophical theme, it has been used to underpin the entire philosophy of neoclassical economics; George Stigler, a key leader of the Chicago School of Economics and close friend of Milton Friedman, once famously greeted a symposium on Smith’s work by saying, â€Å"I bring you greetings from Chicago, where Adam Smith is alive and well.† Much of the confusion about what Smith actually said and intended in his own work and the apparent source of the neoclassical application of the metaphor is the 1948 book Economics by Paul Samuelson, in which he quotes Smith’s â€Å"invisible hand† passage in a way that combines a bit of Smithâ€⠄¢s explanation of self-interest among market participants with the original quotation, thus linking the metaphor – perhaps inaccurately, perhaps not – to Smith’s entire economic philosophy. Despite Dr. Stigler’s amusing greeting, Adam Smith is not, in fact, alive and well to add further insight to the argument over what he really meant, so the safest interpretation is an analysis of what he actually wrote. The market participant prefers domestic industry to foreign industry, and we can infer reasons why this might be so; costs of production and transportation are lower, the goods produced are more suitable to the local market because of more available and complete information, and as a consequence of all that, prices for the goods that are produced are lower. Because the domestic industries are preferred for those reasons alone, the domestic society benefits through the need for labor to produce goods and raw materials – a positive, unintended consequence of the market participants’ pure self-interest. Thus social benefit is created as if guided by an â€Å"invisible hand†. Criticism of the â€Å"Invisible Hand† The strongest argument against the validity of the metaphor, and its consequential idea that markets should be allowed to regulate themselves, comes from the Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, who wrote in his book The Roaring Nineties that, â€Å"the reason that the invisible hand often seems invisible is that it is often not there.† Free markets have certain limitations, according to Stiglitz, one of the most important being their inability to manage â€Å"externalities†. Stiglitz holds that the idea of unintended benefits being allowed to happen without some sort of accounting is irrational; if a person’s actions create a benefit for someone else for which he is not compensated, or if a person benefits from another’s actions without cost to himself, that person will adjust his activities accordingly – either reduce his activity to prevent â€Å"giving something away for free,† or reduce his activity to avoid paying for more tha n he needs, since he is receiving some of it at no cost. MONEY MAKES THE WORLD GO AROUND Stiglitz argues that any time there is imperfect information and some degree of risk uncertainty in markets – which is always – these â€Å"externalities†, which we can understand as â€Å"forces other than the supposed invisible hand and conceptual equilibrium of an efficient market†, are always present and make the market less efficient because market participants â€Å"hold back† a little. That is why, he says, that some of the most important developments in modern civilization, such as the telegraph, genetic advances in food production, and the internet, did not develop in markets but were supported by governments. In other words, some degree, hopefully, a balanced degree, of government intervention in markets is necessary, first to â€Å"take up the slack† in progress towards efficiency that is not happening in markets, and second to reduce risk uncertainty in ways such as enforcing contracts and protecting property rights.

Reflection paper Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 7

Reflection paper - Essay Example They have also dug tunnels beneath the private property of individuals. This is with an aim of preventing Israel from attacking them, or destroying their weapons. This is because by using settlements where people live, Hamas is able to use them as human shields. Under International Law, it is a crime and illegal for soldiers to attack and kill unarmed civilians. Due to this tactic initiated by Hamas, the death toll of civilians in Gaza was so high, that Barnard and Rudoren identify as 650 people. This is by the time that this article was written. Barnard and Rudoren (2014) explain that under international law, Hamas has a legal obligation of minimizing its military operations near areas where civilians are living. Furthermore, they believe that Hamas is committing a war crime, through their action of firing rockets indiscriminately. Barnard and Rudoren (2014) also maintain that Israel has an obligation of identifying specific military targets in Gaza, and ensuring that civilians are not threatened by their military actions. The tactics of using civilians as human shield by Hamas, and storing weapons in civilian neighborhoods, is an example of urban warfare. Under international law, urban warfare is not illegal, but the law requires that the parties to the conflict must ensure that civilians are protected from harm. Barnard and Rudoren recognize that Israel is a more powerful army, as compared to Hamas, and hence to level the field, Hamas had to protect its weapons by hiding them in civilian areas, and engaging Israel in thos e areas (Barnard and Rudoren, 2014). However, after Barnard and Rudoren (2014) quoting thee extensive use of human shields by Hamas, they point out that there is no evidence that Hamas forced civilians to stay in such areas. Through this assertion, Barnard and Rudoren (2014) were trying to denote that Hamas was not committing an international war crime. To judge on whether this

America's Post-Civil War Growing Pains Research Paper - 2

America's Post-Civil War Growing Pains - Research Paper Example irm understanding of the ways in which reconstruction affected the United States much necessarily break down into highly specialized examinations of key groups and individual changes as any broad judgments make the risk of glossing over the ways in which minor details worked together to create major differentials. As a function of this, this brief analysis will seek to answer the following 5 key questions with relation to reconstruction: identification and discussion of two major historical turning points during the Reconstruction period, the impact of these two major historical turning points on society, economy, culture, and politics, discussion of two ways the Reconstruction period may have been different had Lincoln lived, discussion of how industrialization and urbanization affected the life of the average working American, and two examples of how the federal and/or state courts and legislatures handed down decisions or passed laws during the period that served to discriminate a gainst non-white citizens and immigrants (Nilsson 2012). With reference to the first question, the two major historical turning points during the period under the Reconstruction can definitively be those of the completion of the Transcontinental Railroad and the dawn of the industrial period ushered in by the Gilded Age (Bentrix 2007). Both of these factors helped to represent newfound opportunities for a host of disenfranchised and downtrodden individuals who had seen the hope of a better life all but implode as a result of the Civil War. With respect to the completion of the Transcontinental Railroad, this enabled poorer families from back East to risk it all and move West in hopes of building a better life. In this way, the availability of the frontier was again able to absorb much of the historical difficulties that the American people had experienced. Secondly, the dawn of the industrial age helped to give a host of out of work farmers and others individuals well paying jobs