Critical Thinking Week 2 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Critical Thinking Week 2 - Essay Example Nothing is accepted on face value and every aspect of a communication, whether oral or written, is questioned to clearly identify the issues, stated conclusions, arguments, evidence in support and assumptions/omissions/fallacies. This should lead to the right conclusions and right decisions. Clear thinking is all about ‘the ability to engage in reflective and independent thinking’ (Anon., n.d., philosophy.hku.hk). According to Study Guides, clear thinking involves ‘placing the facts and information in a pattern †¦ and †¦ accepting or rejecting the source values and conclusions†¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢ (Anon., n.d., studygs.net). In the following paragraphs, a memo from the Director of Human Resources, Federated State Employees Union (FSEU), Local 343 to its President, in response to the proposal of the Governor of the state of Illinois for economizing the budgeted personnel cost of the department of transportation (DoT) through outsourcing its information systems m anagement, is analyzed applying the critical thinking process through its various steps (Browne and Keeley, 2007). Analysis Step 1: Issue and conclusion The memo lays down the union’s opposition to privatization of jobs as a means to curtail costs, dilates on the perils of the proposed action on union and its members, and attempts to justify the opposition on multiple grounds. The prescriptive issue conveyed is: Should the Governor’s proposal to cut costs by eliminating certain jobs by resorting to privatization be allowed to be implemented? The conclusion is: It is not only a bad idea but also bad in law, and is in effect an attempt to control the union. Step 2: Reasons offered FSEU is questioning the rationale of eliminating jobs through outsourcing, which opens up the possibility of permanent unemployment of the concerned union members. Since outsourcing would potentially invite foreign agents with their unfair advantage of low-wage workers, the proposal is seen as anti-American and as a forerunner for similar attempts in other departments too. Further, it would lead to reduced wages as a result of competition from foreign workers. Dispersal to other departments and potential wage reduction are attempts by the management to gain control over the union. Displaced workers, if at all they get new postings, would need to learn new skills and to cope with new environs, in spite of their age, experience and merit. It is contended that employee reduction/displacement through privatization runs contrary to the Pendleton Act of 1883. Step 3: Ambiguity in reasoning The Wikipedia reference to the relevance of Pendleton Act of 1883 is tenuous and not specific. Words and phrases like ‘instability, most likely, similar, attempt to drive out old experienced workers’ are ambiguous in context and not supported by reason or evidence. Step 4: Value assumptions/conflicts The major value assumed in the memo is the union’s right to protect the i nterests of its members and for citizens at large, both on the present issue and for future. Further, it is argued that yielding by the union on the issue would weaken its position for future negotiations with the management. At the same time, the assumed threat for the union members is sought to be used to garner votes

Stream of Consciousness in Faulkner’s Absolam, Absolam! :: Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom! Essays

Stream of Consciousness in Faulkner’s Absolam, Absolam! While I was reading Absolam, Absolam! I was reminded once again of Faulkner’s particular writing style of stream of consciousness. The book itself is laid out very confusing having multiple narrators depicting incidents of the past, a recurrent theme of Faulkner’s identifying man’s connection to his past. The first narrator of Absolam, Absolam is Rosa, the sister in law of Thomas Sutpen. She describes Sutpen with so much hatred that he almost takes form of a monster, which is incapable of feelings. Interestingly, Rosa is telling her story to Quentin Compson, the second narrator from The Sound and the Fury, who later as we know commits suicide. At the end of the first chapter, I was left with many pieces of what seem to be the tragic story of Thomas Sutpen, a man who mysteriously shows up in Jefferson, Mississippi buys one hundred acres of land and turns it into a plantation. We also know that he becomes married to Ellen who is twenty-four years older than her you nger sister Rosa. The final image of Sutpen given by Rosa is that some black man kills him on his plantation. Rosa also asks Quentin to come with her to the old Sutpen mansion, because she thinks someone is hiding out there. Continuing with his stream of consciousness technique, Faulkner has Mr. Compson tell the next few chapters through his memories of Thomas Sutpen. Sutpen was in the Cival War with General Compson, and as the stories have been passed down to Mr. Compson, he is passing the story now to Quentin. In Mr. Copsons version, I learned of Sutpens marriage disaster, his immediate family,his illegitimate child with a slave, and a previous marriage to a woman who was 1/8 black, who bears Sutpen a son, which is his dream, but also his downfall. He also explains, how Charles Bon, Sutpen’s abandoned 1/8 negro child comes home with Henry Sutpen from college. Later he is killed by Henry, which is not fully explained yet. I think, that there may be a connection between Sutpen’s hatred of non-whites, and the effects they have on his son, Henry.

Pestel Philips Essay

POLITICAL FACTORS Because Philips is an international company, it has to deal with many political factors such as: tax policy, employment laws, environmental regulations, trade restrictions and political stability inside each country they are in. Philips is a manufacturer, a sales company and needs to maintain service organization too, so it must deal with many varieties of laws and policies that are changing, depending the country and the time. For example in many countries of European union now taking place dynamic changes in employment law. (Federation of European employees, 2007) ECONOMIC FACTORS Depending on the country and the economic growth of it, the purchasing power of the population is not the same everywhere. In fact, as Philips is present in many countries, it has to adapt its products and sales processes to the buying habits and the standard of living. For Philips high economic growth means the increasing purchasing power of the population that is desirable for the company. SOCIO-CULTURAL FACTORS The social and cultural influences on business vary from country to country, region to region. It is very important that such factors are considered. Then, it is necessary for Philips to understand the consumer needs and habits in order to meet its expectations. Moreover, in developed countries nowadays, customers are paying more and more attention to ethics, respect and culture of the company. TECHNOLOGICAL FACTORS Because of the international presence of Philips, each country doesn’t have the infrastructure to welcome properly Philips’ technologies, including online processes. So Philips needs to adapt its products to the country where they are. Moreover, Philips Company is very dependant on technology. New innovations can significantly improve operations of the company. Also, it’s important not to neglect the Research and Development department even if it’s the most expensive one. ECOLOGICAL FACTOR: Many countries are now environment concerned and try to reduce pollution. Philips as a large manufacturer can face some problems because of that, even more as it is a lightening company. With the important development of the LED, Philips has a real challenge even if the LED market is not as profitable as the lamp market. LEGAL FACTOR Each country has its own legislation even countries which are parts of the same organization, for example, in Europe, there is the European legislation and the country’s legislation, so Philips needs to be aware of every aspects of this system and adapt quickly.

Essay on “Criticisms of Conventional Morality”

Essay on â€Å"Criticisms of Conventional Morality† 1. What is your conscience? It is not only being aware but being aware that you are aware. It also includes a sense of the relationship between the mind and the world. Could it be no more than the collection of prejudices that you were taught growing up? It is also an awareness of the self as self-existing. Why do you trust your conscience? Descartes said it best, â€Å"I think therefore I am† everything else is a product of thought maybe even existence itself. That is where trust lays who better to trust than yourself? Is it only because doing so â€Å"has brought you sustenance and honors† as Nietzsche suggests? No, it is because it is born of reason and it is from a purely philosophical perspective a construct of the mind and self. 2. Kant claims that the moral law his categorical imperative is to act only according to those maxims or principles of action that one could will to be a universal law of nature. That is, only act in ways that you would want everyone to act. What are Nietzsche’s criticisms of this idea? Nietzsche refused to believe that values and morals carry a priori value. 3. Nietzsche maintains that every action is unique. What does he mean by this? All actions cannot be waited on a single value scale without considering all the variables in order to make a moral judgment. E.g. Killing is wrong but what about in self-defense? How does this claim contribute to his critique of Kant? It means that two moralities then are born the noble Good/Bad and the ignoble Good/Evil. 4. Nietzsche recommends that we create our own values and our own moral laws. How can we accomplish these things? By adopting the age old saying doing unto others as you would unto yourself. 5. According to Nietzsche, different moral codes are designed to achieve difference purposes, that is, different practical aims. Is there any reason, then, to think that there is a moral code that is uniquely true? Yes there are universal values that transcend all social and cognitive constructs if not then we would have no morality and society would break down. 6. Nietzsche claims to have â€Å"discovered two basic types† of morality. What are they? The noble Good/Bad and the ignoble Good/Evil. How do they differ from each other? Ignoble values are reversal born out of resentment of the former created by the strong .e.g. the wealthy say wealth is good while the poor say it is a vice. 7. According to which type or morality does one have duties only to one’s peers? Respect is the morality for one’s peers. Do you think this kind of moral code underwrites nationalism and patriotism? No it is a created human cognitive construct that is a mechanism for collective protection and progress. 8. What does Nietzsche see as the difference between good versus bad and good versus evil? He never gave an alternative to Kant. 9. Nietzsche claims that there are no moral facts whatsoever, that morality is merely symptomatology. What can he mean by this? Morality doesn’t exist and that proving, providing or promoting a value means it is a value just a construct. He denies some values have an intrinsic value Morality is a symptom of what? Civilization which is loss of freedom for we stop being like a bird of prey and have to be civil to each other thus civilization is the ultimate product. Appearance and Reality 1. Russell says that in daily life we sometimes make certain assumptions that we later recognize as mistaken. Can you think of an example of a belief you were quite sure of, that you later found out was false? My parents were infallible and all knowing. 2. What do you think Russell means when he says to view the world as a painter? The painter creates his world through his five senses and his perception. A philosopher? A wise one who uses reason. 3. Russell says that the table in front of him isn’t brown all over. Why not? It is a question of perception and epytimology he may name it by a color not accepted as being called brown what point is Russell making by pointing out this simple fact? What I see and you see are two different things due to perception. 4. Isn’t the shape of the table always the same? No where would you have to be to view the table as a rectangle? From one end at a specific angle 5. How do Russell’s examples suggest a difference between appearance and reality? One is perception born of the mind one is born of the physical world of fixed laws of physics. The Will to believe 1. James argues that we do not have volitional control over our beliefs, that we cannot, just by willing it, believe that Abraham Lincoln’s existence is a myth, for example. Is he right? No he is wrong we can have reason to use to destroy false information as well as science e.g. everybody knows Columbus didn’t discover America simply because he was lost thought he was India and found the ameri-indians there before him If he is right, then are we really responsible in any sense for our beliefs? We are responsible and a distinction must be made between belief and conviction. There is such a thing as wrong conviction and right belief 2 Why does Hames write that â€Å"our faith is someone else’s faith, and in the greatest matters this is most the case†? Do you agree with him? Yes. It is interesting that the god of the conquered e.g. looks exactly like the conquer. It is a wonder that black Africa was conquered by Europeans and their god now looks like a European Jesus. Spanish conquistadors or British colonialist, 3. James maintains that as rational thinkers our goal is to gain truth and avoid error. Yet it is challenging to pursue this goal when the evidence is mixed and inconclusive. James thinks that when the evidence for and against some proposition X is inconclusive, we have three choices: (1) we can withhold belief and continue to amass evidence for and against until we can make a more informed decision, (2) we can go ahead and believe X anyway, or (3) we can go ahead and disbelieve X anyway. What would Clifford recommend we do in such a case? I have my own solution first proposed by the Muslim scholar and theologian Ibn Sina known as Avores. Double truth. Where both can be true. 4. James thinks that the strategy of withholding belief when faced with conflicting evidence amounts to accepting this risk averse strategy: better to miss our on some truths rather than add more errors. He argues that a more risk positive strategy is equally rational, thought: better to add more errors rather than miss our on some truths. Which approach sounds more reasonable to you? Better to add errors so that they maybe eliminated and there in lies the wisdom because error brings truth and truth easily falls to error. 5. James is concerned with whether we should have very high standards for belief or lower our standards and be willing to believe on shakier evidence. What do you think about this issue in a legal setting? Never in a legal setting because innocent people will be robbed of their lives and time. 6. High standards means that we would convict on very compelling evidence (thus seldom convicting the innocent, but at the same time setting guilty people free against whom we had little evidence). Lower standards means that we would be willing to convict on weaker evidence (thus mistakenly convicting more innocent people, but also convicting more guilty people). Is it better to (1) let some guilty go free rather than convict more innocents, or (2) convict more innocents rather than let more guilty go free? Better let guilty go free why what goes around comes around. The society has to change to chastise the guilty. E.g. everybody shuns them.