Utilitarianism is a contrast to classic approaches to ethics Essay Example

Utilitarianism is a contrast to classic approaches to ethics Essay Utilitarianism is a contrast to classic approaches to ethics. One of the main features or indeed the basis of Utilitarianism is the Greatest happiness for the greatest number theory which posses a secular oUtlook to ethics. Utilitarianism is the doctrine according to which actions are made right or wrong so far as they promote happiness, wrong in so far as they promote the reverse. The form of this definition conceals the fact that Utilitarianism is often called the consequentalist doctrine. One main feature of Utilitarianism is that according to Utilitarianism actions are not themselves intrinsically right or wrong; they are right or wrong in so far as they have good or bad oUtcomes.The version of Utilitarianism which holds the greatest happiness for the greatest number theory was popularised by Jeremy Benthem and his disciple John Mill and from them we have the Greatest happiness principle. This derived from a 19th Century philosopher, Jeremy Benthem (1748-1831) who was the founde r of Utilitarianism; Utilitarianism began life as an ethical principle under Jeremy Bentham who theorised that an action is right if it produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people. In its original form the argument had many flaws, so John Stuart Mill decided to defend the principle of Utility against its critics by refining its ideas making them more practical in society.Classic approaches to ethics stress good intentions as essential to morality. For example, tell the trUth because it is morally good to tell the truth, even if it hurts. Classic approaches to ethics often stress the intrinsic value of morality. Unlike classic approaches Utilitarianism does not distribute happiness or goodness in an equalariean manner. Utilitarianism is not about having ideals; it is an aprori approach to morality, a basis that experience counts for everything. One might call it a moral theory of usefulness in terms of the greater good, not in terms of ones selfish desires.Jeremy Ben thams theory of Utilitarianism was based on observation, that the definite good in terms of pleasure and established that two things are intrinsically good, namely pleasure itself and freedom from pain. His logical progression deduced that we ought to increase what is good by increasing what brings us pleasure or freedom from pain. Thus the Principle of Utility was created- act in such a way as to bring about the greatest happiness of the greatest number working to increase the total sum of pleasure. Mill felt that he could strengthen the argument for Utilitarianism by clarifying its points. In his famous argument he simplifies the term happiness and pleasure used by Bentham, as one major criticism is that the word pleasure does not have the same meaning as the word good.Utilitarianism as an ethical theory possesses a main feature whereby it is concerned with the wants and needs of society. One of the appeals of Utilitarianism lies in its practical value, that it can be applied quic kly to any moral dilemma. This is done in a mathematical form, by computing pleasure in the Hedonic Calculus. This is Benthams way of deciding on the correct or most appropriate course of action by analysing the pleasure that arises from it and comparing it with alternatives. He identified seven factors involved in this process, Intensity, Duration, Certainty, Propinquity, Purity, Fecundity and Extent, which help us weigh and assess the quantity of happiness.However there arise problem, hence, provoking criticisms which I will look at in the second question. One of the problems with the Hedonic Calculus was that it judged the quantity of happiness i.e. the number of people but not the quality of the happiness therefore problems arise in assessing its value. Different pleasures bring different amounts of happiness to different people but in Benthamà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½s theory all pleasures are equal. This received much criticism from Victorian society as like Epicurius he commanded all to en joy swinish pleasures, which were frowned upon by the educated classes at this time.Mill attempted to tackle this pitfall by acknowledging that there were higher and lower pleasures. His proof was based on human experience and proposed that no one who has experienced a higher pleasure would sacrifice that knowledge for an experience, however intense, of a lower pleasure. This is illustrated perfectly in the play Educating Rita by Willie ..Where a working class woman experiences the higher pleasures of literature and feels as if she no longer belongs in a pub experiencing lower pleasures. It is therefore possible to verify which pleasures actually do rate higher than others by the experience of those who have known both. Mills version is deals more adequately with what we regard as valuable about human life i.e. there are better and worse ways of being human. As higher pleasures also include that of moral feeling and well being, for example the joy of a quiet conscience felt by helpi ng others they receive special weighting.They have a higher value than they enjoyed previously under Bentham where they were merely a possibility amongst others so Mill has tackled the criticism that morality is not taken seriously enough. Mill has acknowledged the complexity of the concepts of happiness and pleasure. This system appealed to the reforming element of society who pushed for education reforms so that more could experience higher pleasures and have a better quality of life. Mills theory encounters some problems of its own as this separation of the pleasures into two categories makes the hedonic calculus impossible to execute, as instead of one scale there are now two.How can higher and lower be compared? Is the pleasure felt by ten people at the theatre watching Verdis Tosca worth more than a hundred at the cinema watching the latest Brad Pitt film? Now that the quality is different they cannot be measured against each other therefore nullifying the calculus. In reality his attempt to assess the quality of an action end in stating that higher pleasures are morally superior and therefore preferable. But Mills empirical generalisation that no one who has experienced a higher pleasure would sacrifice it for a lower one is not always correct, as it does not account for aesthetics of the individual.Mills version of Utilitarianism is more acceptable in practise as it recognises issues that Bentham left out of his theorem. His method of qualitative assessment of happiness is a progression from Benthamà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½s solely quantitative one which recognises educated pursuits above swinish pleasures. Moral issues are given special treatment under his scheme of higher pleasures, which acknowledges our higher regard for them as human beings. He also attempted to tackle the unstable use of Epicurian words but could not overcome issues like the loss of justice or the difficulty of knowing all possible out. His version though more refined is still flawed leaving a gap for theologians of the future to fill.One of the main features of Utilitarianism is the fact that it gives simple straightforward answers to simple questions, hence the average man on the street can relate to it. For someone who wants this type of philosophy, Utilitarianism is just that; simple and straightforward. As an example, if one asks what should be my guiding principle in life? a Utilitarianism would give a one sentence answer, always act in accordance with the Greatest Happiness Principle. And, lets face it, for the average man on the street that is a plausible thing to hear!One thing about Utilitarianism is that it does appear to be right. Right, that is, in so far as they involve saying that suffering is wrong, that we ought not to make people suffer- aim at preventing suffering, and that the promotion of happiness is right. However, this theory rejects the qminority. If one goes by the Greatest Happiness for the greatest number theory, then the minoritys values a re not valid. The consequences of any action are what matters; hence the saying end justifies the means clearly derives from Utilitarianism. There are no rules that govern moral conduct. A Utilitarianism morality is based on experience and every situation based on its own merits. The main, or dare I say the only thing that matters is achieving the greatest happiness for the greatest number.Other features of which at large strengthen Utilitarianism as an ethical theory is it can be easily applied to decision making, its flexible, practical and is concerned with beneficial results. Utilitarianism compliments a secular outlook on society- and after all, we do live in a secular society, a western style capitalist economy, which have Utilitarianism foundations.The premise of Utilitarianism is a basic and indeed obvious one, avoid pain, like pleasure! It certainly doesnt waste time moralising about rules!2. Obviously, utilitarianism does invoke some criticisms. One factor that is simple, yet I feel valid (after all the premise of utilitarianism is simple) is the fact that it cant cope with everyday situations like murder. A situation which accures in every society. If it cant work for a society then as a philosophy it has failed, after all this theory is about how we should behave in society. To a certain extent I think that we are utilitarian, or at least, that the greatest happiness principle is one of our basic moral principles. But are we total utilitarians? I think not, however, here are three questions that I came across that helped me evaluate the criticisms of utilitarian;* Is everything we think wrong, wrong because it violates the greatest happiness principle?* Is everything we think right, right because it is in accordance with the principle?* If someone were a utilitarian through and through would they fulfil our ideal of a truly moral person?By dissecting the first point I am going to look at examples of things which are either utterly wrong, but dont c ome up wrong in utilitarian grounds, or are at least arguably wrong, but justifiable and right on utilitarian grounds. One of these, as I earlier referred to, being murder.Utilitarianism can justify with a judge allowing a criminal to go unpunished and letting an innocent man to be punished. Utilitarianism has two difficulties with murder and such like a) in saying what is ever wrong with it and b) supposing it has solved that problem, in saying why its wrong in certain cases. This objection to utilitarianism does sound, or does tend to sound absurdmurder not being wrong according to utilitarianism? When it is the doctrine of humanitarianism? This seems ridiculas! But, this is where one must remember the consequentalist doctrine- that an act is to be judged on its outcomes.The strongest point I have established from utilitarianism claims that consequences are the most fundamental idea of utilitarianism. The fundamental outlook is that we should look at what will happen from our acti ons and this is when most criticisms come in. There are three main criticisms, justice, rights and looking back at the past. And, is happiness all that matters?Justice- Utilitarianism is an amoral approach as an ethical theory; therefore it can justify actions that ordinarily we would find adherent- torturing terrorists. Utilitarianism is incompatible with the idea of justice. As an example utilitarianism says that the happiness of the whole human race would be increased (no poverty, disease, theft) but one man would have to suffer eternal torture. According to utilitarianism this would be morally right. However, Im sure some would agree that this is terribly wrong! The Golden Rule states do to others as you want done to you.Rights- a philosophy like Situation Ethics (also Christian Ethics) would say that everyone has rights even the minority. Hence the linking phrase- treat your neighbour how you would like to be treated. A minority of people should not lose their rights to the maj ority.Looking at the past- utilitarianism looks at the future to see if an action will produce happiness and how much. What utilitarianism misses is the fact that the actions based on this philosophy are leaving happiness in the past. Suppose you promise to spend time with a younger sibling who was excited about it but you got more happiness watching a video with your boyfriend, even though it means a lot to your younger sibling. Is utilitarianism saying that it is ok to break promises? What utilitarianism misses is the fact that a) you made a promise and from this causes someone hurt; your sibling.It is quite possible with utilitarianism that we encounter unforeseen situations; which have more harmful results than beneficial. The advantage of having ideals is that if an action causes something bad then at least you can fall back on ideals. With utilitarianism there are no such thing as ideals, therefore one cannot fall back on this premise. If one has moral ideals then it means tha t from the start there is good intention, as utilitarianism is a conceqentalist doctrine then it is reliant on outcomes, and outcomes are never certain.Another criticism, which I noticed, is the fact that a problem could arise when two courses of action produce an equal manner of happiness or goodness, and here comes in the problem of quantifying happiness. Benthams hedonic calculus is meaningless for two reasons;* One cannot reduce happiness or pleasure done to a mathematical formula* We all experience pleasure in different ways, the hedonic calculus presumes we experience pleasure in the same way.We could, theoretically justify any action on utilitarianism grounds by claiming that pleasure is personal and therefore cannot be expressed as a mathematical formula.On a bigger scale a good point is that utilitarianism doesnt distribute goodness or happiness in an equal manner. In certain situations this maybe regarded as unfair, for example, global wealth. Basically assuming that the w ealth of the globe is currently distributed in a utilitarianism manner, this means that some of the world population is starving, and this is evident in the world. It would be fairer to redistribute wealth so the poor do not starve, however this may not be justifiable in utilitarianism grounds. It may be that if the wealthy have to give up some of their resources they incur a disproportionate amount of pleasure derived from the poor. Utilitarianism is a contrast to classic approaches to ethics Essay Example Utilitarianism is a contrast to classic approaches to ethics Essay Utilitarianism is a contrast to classic approaches to ethics. One of the main features or indeed the basis of Utilitarianism is the Greatest happiness for the greatest number theory which posses a secular oUtlook to ethics. Utilitarianism is the doctrine according to which actions are made right or wrong so far as they promote happiness, wrong in so far as they promote the reverse. The form of this definition conceals the fact that Utilitarianism is often called the consequentalist doctrine. One main feature of Utilitarianism is that according to Utilitarianism actions are not themselves intrinsically right or wrong; they are right or wrong in so far as they have good or bad oUtcomes.The version of Utilitarianism which holds the greatest happiness for the greatest number theory was popularised by Jeremy Benthem and his disciple John Mill and from them we have the Greatest happiness principle. This derived from a 19th Century philosopher, Jeremy Benthem (1748-1831) who was the founde r of Utilitarianism; Utilitarianism began life as an ethical principle under Jeremy Bentham who theorised that an action is right if it produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people. In its original form the argument had many flaws, so John Stuart Mill decided to defend the principle of Utility against its critics by refining its ideas making them more practical in society.Classic approaches to ethics stress good intentions as essential to morality. For example, tell the trUth because it is morally good to tell the truth, even if it hurts. Classic approaches to ethics often stress the intrinsic value of morality. Unlike classic approaches Utilitarianism does not distribute happiness or goodness in an equalariean manner. Utilitarianism is not about having ideals; it is an aprori approach to morality, a basis that experience counts for everything. One might call it a moral theory of usefulness in terms of the greater good, not in terms of ones selfish desires.Jeremy Ben thams theory of Utilitarianism was based on observation, that the definite good in terms of pleasure and established that two things are intrinsically good, namely pleasure itself and freedom from pain. His logical progression deduced that we ought to increase what is good by increasing what brings us pleasure or freedom from pain. Thus the Principle of Utility was created- act in such a way as to bring about the greatest happiness of the greatest number working to increase the total sum of pleasure. Mill felt that he could strengthen the argument for Utilitarianism by clarifying its points. In his famous argument he simplifies the term happiness and pleasure used by Bentham, as one major criticism is that the word pleasure does not have the same meaning as the word good.Utilitarianism as an ethical theory possesses a main feature whereby it is concerned with the wants and needs of society. One of the appeals of Utilitarianism lies in its practical value, that it can be applied quic kly to any moral dilemma. This is done in a mathematical form, by computing pleasure in the Hedonic Calculus. This is Benthams way of deciding on the correct or most appropriate course of action by analysing the pleasure that arises from it and comparing it with alternatives. He identified seven factors involved in this process, Intensity, Duration, Certainty, Propinquity, Purity, Fecundity and Extent, which help us weigh and assess the quantity of happiness.However there arise problem, hence, provoking criticisms which I will look at in the second question. One of the problems with the Hedonic Calculus was that it judged the quantity of happiness i.e. the number of people but not the quality of the happiness therefore problems arise in assessing its value. Different pleasures bring different amounts of happiness to different people but in Benthamà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½s theory all pleasures are equal. This received much criticism from Victorian society as like Epicurius he commanded all to en joy swinish pleasures, which were frowned upon by the educated classes at this time.Mill attempted to tackle this pitfall by acknowledging that there were higher and lower pleasures. His proof was based on human experience and proposed that no one who has experienced a higher pleasure would sacrifice that knowledge for an experience, however intense, of a lower pleasure. This is illustrated perfectly in the play Educating Rita by Willie ..Where a working class woman experiences the higher pleasures of literature and feels as if she no longer belongs in a pub experiencing lower pleasures. It is therefore possible to verify which pleasures actually do rate higher than others by the experience of those who have known both. Mills version is deals more adequately with what we regard as valuable about human life i.e. there are better and worse ways of being human. As higher pleasures also include that of moral feeling and well being, for example the joy of a quiet conscience felt by helpi ng others they receive special weighting.They have a higher value than they enjoyed previously under Bentham where they were merely a possibility amongst others so Mill has tackled the criticism that morality is not taken seriously enough. Mill has acknowledged the complexity of the concepts of happiness and pleasure. This system appealed to the reforming element of society who pushed for education reforms so that more could experience higher pleasures and have a better quality of life. Mills theory encounters some problems of its own as this separation of the pleasures into two categories makes the hedonic calculus impossible to execute, as instead of one scale there are now two.How can higher and lower be compared? Is the pleasure felt by ten people at the theatre watching Verdis Tosca worth more than a hundred at the cinema watching the latest Brad Pitt film? Now that the quality is different they cannot be measured against each other therefore nullifying the calculus. In reality his attempt to assess the quality of an action end in stating that higher pleasures are morally superior and therefore preferable. But Mills empirical generalisation that no one who has experienced a higher pleasure would sacrifice it for a lower one is not always correct, as it does not account for aesthetics of the individual.Mills version of Utilitarianism is more acceptable in practise as it recognises issues that Bentham left out of his theorem. His method of qualitative assessment of happiness is a progression from Benthamà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½s solely quantitative one which recognises educated pursuits above swinish pleasures. Moral issues are given special treatment under his scheme of higher pleasures, which acknowledges our higher regard for them as human beings. He also attempted to tackle the unstable use of Epicurian words but could not overcome issues like the loss of justice or the difficulty of knowing all possible out. His version though more refined is still flawed leaving a gap for theologians of the future to fill.One of the main features of Utilitarianism is the fact that it gives simple straightforward answers to simple questions, hence the average man on the street can relate to it. For someone who wants this type of philosophy, Utilitarianism is just that; simple and straightforward. As an example, if one asks what should be my guiding principle in life? a Utilitarianism would give a one sentence answer, always act in accordance with the Greatest Happiness Principle. And, lets face it, for the average man on the street that is a plausible thing to hear!One thing about Utilitarianism is that it does appear to be right. Right, that is, in so far as they involve saying that suffering is wrong, that we ought not to make people suffer- aim at preventing suffering, and that the promotion of happiness is right. However, this theory rejects the qminority. If one goes by the Greatest Happiness for the greatest number theory, then the minoritys values a re not valid. The consequences of any action are what matters; hence the saying end justifies the means clearly derives from Utilitarianism. There are no rules that govern moral conduct. A Utilitarianism morality is based on experience and every situation based on its own merits. The main, or dare I say the only thing that matters is achieving the greatest happiness for the greatest number.Other features of which at large strengthen Utilitarianism as an ethical theory is it can be easily applied to decision making, its flexible, practical and is concerned with beneficial results. Utilitarianism compliments a secular outlook on society- and after all, we do live in a secular society, a western style capitalist economy, which have Utilitarianism foundations.The premise of Utilitarianism is a basic and indeed obvious one, avoid pain, like pleasure! It certainly doesnt waste time moralising about rules!2. Obviously, utilitarianism does invoke some criticisms. One factor that is simple, yet I feel valid (after all the premise of utilitarianism is simple) is the fact that it cant cope with everyday situations like murder. A situation which accures in every society. If it cant work for a society then as a philosophy it has failed, after all this theory is about how we should behave in society. To a certain extent I think that we are utilitarian, or at least, that the greatest happiness principle is one of our basic moral principles. But are we total utilitarians? I think not, however, here are three questions that I came across that helped me evaluate the criticisms of utilitarian;* Is everything we think wrong, wrong because it violates the greatest happiness principle?* Is everything we think right, right because it is in accordance with the principle?* If someone were a utilitarian through and through would they fulfil our ideal of a truly moral person?By dissecting the first point I am going to look at examples of things which are either utterly wrong, but dont c ome up wrong in utilitarian grounds, or are at least arguably wrong, but justifiable and right on utilitarian grounds. One of these, as I earlier referred to, being murder.Utilitarianism can justify with a judge allowing a criminal to go unpunished and letting an innocent man to be punished. Utilitarianism has two difficulties with murder and such like a) in saying what is ever wrong with it and b) supposing it has solved that problem, in saying why its wrong in certain cases. This objection to utilitarianism does sound, or does tend to sound absurdmurder not being wrong according to utilitarianism? When it is the doctrine of humanitarianism? This seems ridiculas! But, this is where one must remember the consequentalist doctrine- that an act is to be judged on its outcomes.The strongest point I have established from utilitarianism claims that consequences are the most fundamental idea of utilitarianism. The fundamental outlook is that we should look at what will happen from our acti ons and this is when most criticisms come in. There are three main criticisms, justice, rights and looking back at the past. And, is happiness all that matters?Justice- Utilitarianism is an amoral approach as an ethical theory; therefore it can justify actions that ordinarily we would find adherent- torturing terrorists. Utilitarianism is incompatible with the idea of justice. As an example utilitarianism says that the happiness of the whole human race would be increased (no poverty, disease, theft) but one man would have to suffer eternal torture. According to utilitarianism this would be morally right. However, Im sure some would agree that this is terribly wrong! The Golden Rule states do to others as you want done to you.Rights- a philosophy like Situation Ethics (also Christian Ethics) would say that everyone has rights even the minority. Hence the linking phrase- treat your neighbour how you would like to be treated. A minority of people should not lose their rights to the maj ority.Looking at the past- utilitarianism looks at the future to see if an action will produce happiness and how much. What utilitarianism misses is the fact that the actions based on this philosophy are leaving happiness in the past. Suppose you promise to spend time with a younger sibling who was excited about it but you got more happiness watching a video with your boyfriend, even though it means a lot to your younger sibling. Is utilitarianism saying that it is ok to break promises? What utilitarianism misses is the fact that a) you made a promise and from this causes someone hurt; your sibling.It is quite possible with utilitarianism that we encounter unforeseen situations; which have more harmful results than beneficial. The advantage of having ideals is that if an action causes something bad then at least you can fall back on ideals. With utilitarianism there are no such thing as ideals, therefore one cannot fall back on this premise. If one has moral ideals then it means tha t from the start there is good intention, as utilitarianism is a conceqentalist doctrine then it is reliant on outcomes, and outcomes are never certain.Another criticism, which I noticed, is the fact that a problem could arise when two courses of action produce an equal manner of happiness or goodness, and here comes in the problem of quantifying happiness. Benthams hedonic calculus is meaningless for two reasons;* One cannot reduce happiness or pleasure done to a mathematical formula* We all experience pleasure in different ways, the hedonic calculus presumes we experience pleasure in the same way.We could, theoretically justify any action on utilitarianism grounds by claiming that pleasure is personal and therefore cannot be expressed as a mathematical formula.On a bigger scale a good point is that utilitarianism doesnt distribute goodness or happiness in an equal manner. In certain situations this maybe regarded as unfair, for example, global wealth. Basically assuming that the w ealth of the globe is currently distributed in a utilitarianism manner, this means that some of the world population is starving, and this is evident in the world. It would be fairer to redistribute wealth so the poor do not starve, however this may not be justifiable in utilitarianism grounds. It may be that if the wealthy have to give up some of their resources they incur a disproportionate amount of pleasure derived from the poor.

Free Essays on The Psalms Of Life

bivouac- an unsheltered encampment or camp CHARACTERS A. heart of the young man- this is the one narrating the story, he thinks that life should be should not be thought of in such a depressing manor. He looks to it as a more positive experience, speaking of setting examples to teach those who come after us. B. the psalmist- he is the one who the young man is speaking to in the poem. IMPRESSIONS I think this poem has a very good meaning behind it, I wouldn’t call it sad or frightening, more uplifting in it’s own way. The way the young man speaks of life and how it should be lived, is something I think that lives in the heart of all of us as a society. This is a very good poem, one that should get people thinking about how they live their own lives. IDEAS/EVENTS I agree with the ideas this young man is trying to get across in this poem, I believe everyone should live with this same sort of attitude toward life unfortunately I do not think that everyone will have this same attitude toward life as the young man in the poem. CONFLICTS I do not believe that there are any real conflicts in this poem. PASSAGES OR SENTENCES A. â€Å"But to act, that each to-morrow Find us farther than to-day† B. â€Å"Trust no Future, however pleasant! Let the dead Past bury its dead! Act,-act in the living present! Heart within, and God o’erheard† B. â€Å"Lives of great men all remind us We can make our lives sublime, And, departing, leave behind us Footprints on the sands of time Footprints, that perhaps another, Sailing, o’er life’s solemn main, A forlorn and shipwrecked brother,Seeing, shall take heart again† QUESTIONS I wonder what incident has happened for this boy to make him question life in such a way and feel the need to explain his feelings to others? SYM... Free Essays on The Psalms Of Life Free Essays on The Psalms Of Life â€Å"The Psalms of Life† By Henry Wadsworth Longfellow NEW WORDS bivouac- an unsheltered encampment or camp CHARACTERS A. heart of the young man- this is the one narrating the story, he thinks that life should be should not be thought of in such a depressing manor. He looks to it as a more positive experience, speaking of setting examples to teach those who come after us. B. the psalmist- he is the one who the young man is speaking to in the poem. IMPRESSIONS I think this poem has a very good meaning behind it, I wouldn’t call it sad or frightening, more uplifting in it’s own way. The way the young man speaks of life and how it should be lived, is something I think that lives in the heart of all of us as a society. This is a very good poem, one that should get people thinking about how they live their own lives. IDEAS/EVENTS I agree with the ideas this young man is trying to get across in this poem, I believe everyone should live with this same sort of attitude toward life unfortunately I do not think that everyone will have this same attitude toward life as the young man in the poem. CONFLICTS I do not believe that there are any real conflicts in this poem. PASSAGES OR SENTENCES A. â€Å"But to act, that each to-morrow Find us farther than to-day† B. â€Å"Trust no Future, however pleasant! Let the dead Past bury its dead! Act,-act in the living present! Heart within, and God o’erheard† B. â€Å"Lives of great men all remind us We can make our lives sublime, And, departing, leave behind us Footprints on the sands of time Footprints, that perhaps another, Sailing, o’er life’s solemn main, A forlorn and shipwrecked brother,Seeing, shall take heart again† QUESTIONS I wonder what incident has happened for this boy to make him question life in such a way and feel the need to explain his feelings to others? SYM...

What are the driving forces of globalization and what effects does Essay

What are the driving forces of globalization and what effects does globalization have on the policy-making capabilities of states - Essay Example 256-260), â€Å"globalization integrates many countries together.† It is an observation that after globalization, developed and developing countries have got an opportunity to interconnect themselves together (Frieden, pp. 256-260). Since the time when people began to travel and explore the world outside their limited boundaries, an era of development commenced. This development was in the form of advancements in the trade patterns and scientific discoveries (Boutaleb, p.1). However, now the notion of development has acquired a very different and diverse context. It now includes learning from diverse group of people, intermingling of cultures, and working for mutual success. Thus, â€Å"Globalization is the phenomenon, which can be stated as intermingling of nations and people culturally, and economically† (Smith, p.1). Transportation and media has shortened the distances between two nations, as well as the people. In today’s era of globalization, one can acquire information about anything, and can move from one continent to another in a matter of time, which otherwise would require years of constant traveling. Moreover, on one hand, people had to perform their work with their hands and had to rely on primitive methods of earning and livelihood in previous years; however, in the recent years, globalization has given access to a bountiful of virtual, natural, and artificial resources that offer their utilization to change the lifestyles completely. It means that people can learn from others experiences and build further on rather than learning by experiencing it themselves and starting any work from scratch. People are social animals, created by God to develop and learn with mutual interaction and contact with the natural surrounding. An individual living on a deserted island cannot rely totally on his own skill as a survivor, no matter how courageous and introvert he is. He needs certain assistance and other human beings to talk, learn,

History Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 2

History - Research Paper Example The paper will illustrate the diverse relationship that exists between Europe and the world and the different historical events that have that occurred in different parts of the world involving Europe. The French are one of the most influential European members having colonized numerous parts in northern, central and eastern Africa. The colonial rule of the French has often been compared with American imperialism. The Americas were once owned by the Europeans themselves before decolonizing, with the United States doing this between 1776 and 1783. Haiti, South and Central America shortly followed the United States and gained their independence from European rule. The loss of control in these parts of the world led the Europeans to focus their sites on Asia and Africa as they were still looking to expand their empire. On the European conquest for Asia, Vietnam was occupied by the French in the year 1858, with an attack on D Nang and the French established full control over the country by the year 1897. The Europeans always looked for places that were of substantial basis and economic value and in the case of Vietnam; rubber was the main economic generator for the country. However, other Asian countries also deemed themselves powerful and the Japanese were able to invade Vietnam and before withdrawing from the country after the Hiroshima catastrophe. However, despite previous Japanese invasion, the French were unwilling to recognize Vietnam as an independent state and this led to a war in which the French army was defeated in 1954. External influence did not end after this war as the American also played a role in the governing of the country to the extent that there was a split between the anti communist and communist parts of the country. The involvement of the United States in and the formation of a partnership with the

Character analysis on young Goodman Brown Thesis

Character analysis on young Goodman Brown - Thesis Example In Young Goodman Brown, the character of Brown changes from faith and innocence to corruption and doubts as the devils distorts the way he thinks and perceives valuable people in his life. The faith and goodness of Brown are seen in the way he treats his father, grandfather, minister, and wife. He looks up to the goodness of his father and grandfather and the minister. Brown believes in the true Christina nature of the minister of Salem because he is a man of God. His wife Faith comes into his life a young immaculate and beautiful woman. He invests all his trust in the life of his wife, and life seems good in his belief that he has found a true partner to share his life happiness and glory. Faith is a staunch Christian, who is an epitome of good and purity but not until the devils come knocking on their doors. Brown’s innocence is lost when the devil visits his home and changes the way he views the valuable people in his life. Brown interjects, â€Å"what if the devil himself should be at my very elbow† (9). His wife Faith is no longer the pious and religious figure, and he hopes that the character would persist for the rest of her life. However, the arrival of the devil elicits doubts about the true nature of faith. He starts doubting her after seeing him in the evil ceremony in the forest. The devil also reveals the two followers, Deacon Gookin, and Goody Cloyse that Brown has known all along that they are staunch Christians (Hawthorne 16). The character of Brown here is seen to shaky because he is convinced to think otherwise about the community he has known his entire life. The arrival of the devil changes the faith and innocence of Brown to corruption. The evil nature of the people around him comes as a surprise, and that convinces him that the entire Puritan society is hypocritical. The revelations that come to him give him a different perspective of the society that he knows professes its Christian faith in

Objectives and methods of Lean Manufacturing

Objectives and methods of Lean Manufacturing 1. INTRODUCTION This report is a broad introduction to Lean Manufacturing. Lean manufacturing is a group of methods which are being gradually more implemented around the world and the greater competitiveness for manufactures. This assignment report reviews the main objectives of lean manufacturing and the method of eliminating waste. The organisational, operational and human barriers that need to solve to achieve the successful lean manufacturing strategy. The challenges and problems faced by the company named Bajaj Motors in terms of quality of its process and the brief knowledge of the main approaches of lean manufacturing like Kaizen, Just-in-time, Total quality management (TQM) and Six sigma to achieve a successful organisation. 1.1 LEAN MANUFACTURING Radhakrishnan (2008) states that Lean manufacturing is a systematic phenomenon to determine and eliminate the transportation waste, waste of time, waste of human resource and other waste. In Lean manufacturing small lots are prepared and dispatch at the same time. It an aim at providing best and optimum quality through formation of the technique where in each subpart is examined before putting step further. 1.2 OBJECTIVES OF LEAN MANUFACTURING as mentioned by Alavala 2008. 1.2.1 QUALITY: Improvement in quality means elimination of number of errors. The main objective of lean manufacturing is to attain optimum level in quality without any or low fluctuation in operating cost. 1.2.2 PRODUCTIVITY: Productivity is the result of lean manufacturing because same amount of resources which were used earlier now produces better result leading to increase productivity. 1.2.3 WASTE: The other main objective of lean manufacturing is to reduce waste like waste of time, waste of efforts, waste of resources etc which will help to get higher productivity and higher profit level. 1.2.4 HELP TO KEEP IN ORDER: Lean manufacturing help to keep everything in order, which will help to find right tool at immediate situation, clean and tidy work place, economic of scale and leading to fast functioning of operations. 1.2.5 STANDARDIZED: Adopting Lean manufacturing result in standardized of resources like place for everything and everything in its right place. This makes performance of operation smooth and steady. 1.2.6 OPTIMUM UTILIZATION OF RESOURCES: Lean manufacturing aims at optimum or full utilization of resources (time, money, efforts, humans, machines etc.) full utilization in accordance to set standards of organization are always beneficial to organization. 1.2.7 THOROUGH CHEKING: Lean manufacturing involves in depth examination of the process as soon as the task is over. As a result short comings are sought out at the very first step before moving to next stage and efficiency is maintained at every stage. 1.3 REDUCTION OF WASTE: One of the most important aspects of lean manufacturing is cut down of waste or scrap as a result unnecessary flow of raw material, time, money and efforts are save thus manufacturing cost decreases and net profit increases and the ultimate goal of any concern is to achieve profit like optimising the profit and satisfying the employees working in there and thus it is very important for the organization. As lean manufacturing work on the mechanism of à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“work for everyone and every one on the right workà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚  if organization follows this phenomenon it would result in reduction of waste and hence could be easily achieved. 1.4 HISTORY OF LEAN MANUFACTURING: Moore (2007) demonstrate that the foundation of lean manufacturing was formed late back from 1910 when assembly line technique of ford was formed, later on a Japanese company name Toyota motors use assembly line technique of ford and many other technique which were combined together and formed Toyota production system or just in time but it was later termed as lean manufacturing which was originated in Toyota manufacturing plant. 1.5 MASS PRODUCTION: The manufacturing of the product in large quantity. It is done by using assembly line or another means of production. It is totally different from the lean manufacturing. Mass production produces in large size whereas lean production produces smaller lots just that much as market required. Mass production is a push type production whereas lean production is pull type production. 1.6 APPLICATION OF LEAN MANUFACTURING: Lean manufacturing is mainly followed in manufacturing systems as the concept is made in accordance to manufacturing concerns. Though many other business are trying to apply this phenomena but the majority of result was in negative as each organization have there own process, technique, variability, objectives etc. But while considering the competitive market business other than manufacturing are also going for lean manufacturing. 1.7 FUTURE OF LEAN MANUFACTURING: The future of lean manufacturing is very titanic (big, bright). The main reason for this is the nonstop rising of inflation rate. As we know lean aims at cutting the cost of waste so in this competitive world the organization that can cut down the waste cost will be the most feasible among all so its importance will definitely goanna rise in the future and organizations, business would be running after it. 2. CULTURAL CHANGE: Wilson (2009) states that Cultural change is the process of bringing the change in the beliefs which are deep rooted, assumptions, perception, values and shared feelings etc which influence the decision process of the organization. In short we can say that application of changes in the prevailing or existing culture leads to cultural change. Lean manufacturing bring the cultural change through the application of 5S, SIX SIGMA, KAZINE etc which change the route of the organization and lead organization to achieve optimum level goals. 2.1 EXPENSIVE: lean manufacturing is a expensive process as implementation of lean strategies in the organization involve huge expenditure example applying kazine, just in time, 5s, six sigma in organization involve stopping up of daily routine, new mindset are needed, new philosophy and so on. Moreover lean aims at reducing WASTES this process of reducing waste is also very expensive and many small industries may not opt lean. 2.2 MISSING OUT SOME OF THE TOOLS: Lean cannot be implemented successfully if their applications are missing because every different application have different set of goals and objectives which cannot be achieved by other applications like six sigma cannot substitute cell manufacturing and so on. Thus we can say that foundation for the successes of lean are lay down by the proper implementation and understanding of all its applications. 2.3 NORMAL PRODUTION: Lean manufacturing do disturb the normal production as applying lean involve setting up of entirely new procedures and application. As a result the normal production process is disturbed for some period. It may consider as a barrier because applying lean would require some time for effective performance. Till the time lean produces effective result it is considered as a barrier. 2.4 ROLE OF PERSONAL SKILLS: Lean manufacturing aims at bringing change and this change would work efficiently only when human resource involved in lean manufacturing are having some widely common personal skills. Personal skills like working in a team, working along with team, communication, problem handling etc are utmost important for people in lean manufacturing. If people of any organization lack in such personal skills than in such a condition these skill would act as a barrier for lean manufacturing. 2.5 EFFECTIVE MANGEMENT LEADERSHIP: Moyles (2006) demonstrates that Effective management leadership is very crucial for the organization as in the absence of the leadership the employee will do what they wish like moreover they may refused to achieve the goals set by lean manufacturing. Lack of leadership control in organization would led to delay in results, Delay in task operation, delay in achievement of goals. Thus an effective management control is necessary for organization otherwise it will act like a barrier. 3. CHALLANGES FACEDE BY BAJAJ (INDIA) IN ACCORDANCE TO ITS PRODUCT: Bajaj one of the leading company of two wheelers in India. Bajaj in India aims at achieving customer satisfaction. The prim motive of Bajaj motors in India is customer satisfaction first and then profit. But Bajaj motors made one wrong decision that was launching Baja pulsar200 which proved as a threat to the company soon after it was launched as customer problem with Bajaj was rising day by day and was hampering the company image. The prime challenges faced by BAJAJ MOTRS were its product named Bajaj pulsar 200. This particular product was refused by market due to following reasons: 1: Poor handling poor handing of Baja pulsar 200 was a major problem as its cutting on the curve was quite difficult and as a result it leads to many major accident and thus creating a wrong or negative image in mind regarding the product and company. 2: Start up problem which is faced by Bajaj pulsar 200 was the starting problem especially during winters as Baja pulsar 200 was not having a kick to start and itself starter was not that good. 3: The other major drawbacks faced by Bajaj pulsar 200 was its look. It dint look attractive at all infact it was bulky and dish aped. 4: uncomfortable while riding this problem was usually felt during the long ride as it seat are divided into two sections which make it more uncomfortable and inconvenient while riding. 5: Problem with gear pattern which make inconvenient for rider in shifting the gear while riding and this again lead to large number of accident of the riders. 6: The other major issue with the bike was its average its average was not that good in comparison with the other bike in the same segment. All the above mentioned problems were in accordance to manufacturing process. The impact of failure of Bajaj 200 was so powerful that the entire image of Bajaj was getting down in customer mind as a result Bajaj pulsar 200 was totally banned by Baja motors in India and new product named Bajaj pulsar 220 was added to the list. 3.1 APPROACH FOR THE REMEDIES: The best approach for the quality improvement is ISO 9000. If Bajaj would have followed this certification there would have been no reason to shutdown pulsar 200. As this certification would have sort all the manufacturing problem through quality standardization and as a result product problem would have been sort out and customer friendly product would have been made. 3.2 PERMANENT STRATEGY: In accordance to my knowledge and views Bajaj motors should permanently adopt ISO 9000 because at present products of Bajaj motors like pulsar 220, pulsar 150, pulsar 180, pulsar dtsi faces the same common problem of handling and repair which were in pulsar 200. Application of ISO 9000 would help the Bajaj motors to overcome the quality defects at manufacturing stage and moreover the standard would be set below which nothing would be acceptable by the organization thus problem would be sort out within the organization. In the other hand company will be beneficial in marketing as being ISO certified. 4. KAIZEN: Alukal et al. (2006) states that Kaizen is a Japanese concept of management. The meaning of kaizen is in it word only kai (which means change) and Zen (which means good or better) i.e. bringing in the change which is good for the organization. Kaizen is a continuous process of bringing in small small change that accounts for very big and positive results. And it is based on the phenomena that every single phase of our life need little but constant changes. 4.1 MAJOR OBJECTIVE OF KAIZEN as mentioned by Alukal et al. (2006) 1: Aims at providing world class manufacturing process is to the concern in which it is applied as change are effective only on those manufacturing concern where manufacturing process is of world class standards and in accordance to the prevailing technology. 2: Aims at improving quality improvement is the core of kaizen. According to kaizen phenomena no matter how small or big the change is but there should be a change like keeping it simple and dynamic. 3: Aims to provide job environment safe and secure. Kaizen aims at providing safe healthy and secure work climate for its employees and management. As change is effective in a place where people are supportive and environment is healthy. 4: Aims at eliminating waste, the most important objective of kaizen is to eliminate the waste (waste are the thing that things that do not add anything to the product still is the part of manufacturing process) this would enhance manufacturing process and would speed up the process moreover resources like men, money, time etc of the organization are saved and ultimately leading to the organizational profit. 4.2. JUST IN TIME: Lai et al. (2009) demonstrate that Just in time technique was developed by Toyota motors and this technique was copied at almost all manufacturing plant. JIT is a technique where in superior management is needed and large work force. Just in time technique is a phenomenon of making the raw material and finished products at the time they are needed i.e. eliminating the time lag. And it generates no substantial risk to the organization. 4.3. MAIN OBJECTIVES OF JUST IN TIME: 1: Maintain the proper stock level. It means that an adequate level of stock is maintained in the warehouses so that the holding cost and other expenses related to stock are all manageable and most importantly the need of the manufacturing concern are meet as an when needed. 2: Maintain proper or true position of inventory. It denotes that there should be no fake data recorded in the books. The data and facts recorded should denote the actual position of the stock. 4.4. TOTAL QUALITY MANGEMENT: Sashkin et al. (1993) states that Total quality management is a management phenomenon that seeks to full fill the need of the customer without compromising in quality like providing customer quality they want or better than what they want. It could be achieved with integration of quality related functions. This phenomenon is based on the concept that the set standards should be achieved and anything below the standards is not acceptable at all and anything above the set standards is appreciated. As a result no compromise is done with the product quality and ultimately the customer is satisfied as quality is set and based on the taste preference and requirement of the customers. 4.5. SIX SIGMA: Tennant (2001) demonstrates that six sigma is methodology developed by Motorola which emphasizes setting high objectives, collecting data and analyzing results to achieve the different way to reduce defects in products and services. It is important to find the appropriate method for the company to achieve the goal for quick response for the customer and increase the customer satisfaction. The requirement encouraged them to adopt either six sigma to improve process or Kaizen to reduce waste in process. However both have some limitations as a result company need to combine their strength. Six sigma focus on the quality improvement and satisfaction of the customer whereas Kaizen focus on elimination of waste which arise in process. However the Kaizen cannot put a process under statistical control and six sigma cannot increase process speed alone. 5. CONCLUSION By completing this report it is clear that the lean manufacturing play a very important role in organization. It helps to reduce waste and the process which is not necessary to reduce the production cost. It explains how to increase the efficiency of the organization.

Theme of Power in Harold Pinters The Homecoming :: Harold Pinter Homecoming Essays

The Theme of Power in The Homecoming Author: Sarah Marchant In Harold Pinter's "The Homecoming" one of the important themes is power. Many of the characters try to exert power. Many of the characters try to exert power over others through various means such as sexuality and intelligence. The use of violence within the household is believed by the men to be the most important tool of power. However, when Ruth, the only woman in the play, enters, she appears to defeat the men's power, but not with violence. Her sexuality and apparent intelligence become part of the way in which she takes control of the house. Power itself is the ability to take control and exert authority over others. Violence is a physical form of this. It usually takes the form of a display of force and this could be an unjust or even unlawful action. There could be a use of violent language or an element of threatened violence. However, the degree of power this holds is determined by the reaction of those threatened, or whether or not anything comes of the threat. Teddy introduces his wife, Ruth, into his childhood home that is a scene of tense threats and reports of violence - both sexual and physical. As soon as the play begins there is conflict between Lenny and his father, Max. Having been insulted by Lenny, Max threatens him with his stick, saying "Don't you talk to me like that. I'm warning you". However, nothing comes of this threat. The only element of power that can be inferred comes from the way in which Lenny makes no response. Perhaps he has previous experience of Max's anger, or it could be that both parties know that there is no point in pursuing the matter. The power that is expected to come with a threat is non-existent in this household as the threats are well-worn and always empty. Max demands that Teddy and Ruth leave his house, yet by the end of the play, he is sobbing and yearning for attention from Ruth. The insults and derogatory terms used within the family are not so much an element of power as a way of life. As there is no real mother figure within the household, the men have lapsed into a way of life in which they can show no affection to each other. Instead they insult each other in ways usually reserved for women: "bitch" and "slag".