The Contributions of Immigrants to Singapore Essay Example for Free

The Contributions of Immigrants to capital of Singapore EssaySingapore began to open itself up as a centre for entrepot trade. It began to import and export goods for different areas to different parts of the world. These immigrants also provided important support services such as workers in the dockyards, plantations, factories and some even provided daily necessities for traders wholly over the world. All these contributions of the immigrants helped to maintain Singapore as an attractive trading centre and kept it competitive.Without them, Singapore would not have grown so immobile from a backwater island to a bustling island of trade and other commercial activities. Hence, the impact of the coming of the immigrants leading Singapore to a well-grown trading centre was the most important. However, anyhow the impact of growth of Singapore as a trading centre, there were other social impacts such as acts of philanthropy by rich businessmen. These businessmen from different et hnic groups saw the need to contribute to the well-being of the society and started kind acts such as building schools, hospitals and places of worship for their fellow countrymen.An example would be Tan Tock Seng. Such acts were important as they made lives of the immigrants more bearable and ensured that these immigrants were well taken care off so that they could continue to contribute to Singapore growth. All in all, the most important impact of the coming of the immigrants was the growth of Singapore as a trading centre as it is due to their gravely work that Singapore could continue to grow and this would benefit everyone. As for the acts of the philanthropists, some of these acts were given to specific ethnic groups only, hence the impact is not as neat as the first.

International human resources Essay Example for Free

International human resources EssayIt is the biggest challenge of companies today to maintain and attract best employees thus the identification in holding trainings and conferences for top executives to level officers is exceedingly in motivation. Initiating strategies and solutions regarding employee retention and human resource management keep on going to minimize cost and money. There are many promising solutions in going through a lot of obstacles in human resource recruitment. We may start on some questions that would spark a cutting beginning are the employees are given the chance to speak?Are new ideas accepted? Are benefits unfeignedly beneficial to employees? Does the employees opinion count? Are dallys valued, evaluated and repayed on their performance? This are simple questions that has an impact to the existing problems in many companies, regardless of size, incorporating opposite issues like repatriation, better opportunities, poor treatment, differences in cult ure and disagreement on the direction of the company, lack of recognition, indefinite growth prospects and poor relationship among co-workers. Keeping peck and maintaining them for a longer period of time is the most difficult and challenging tasks for all human resources managers nowadays, hopefully, we ordain answer possible keys and solutions to these burning questions throughout the discussion. wherefore are people leaving from one company to another?A wide variety of reasons why are people leaving their jobs to find new companies includes expectations were not satisfactorily fulfilled, unsuitable for the role, do not fit with the companys culture, insufficient opportunities for growth and development, inadequate acknowledgment and admiration, problems with a manager or supervisor, not satisfied with the compensation, stress, lack of work and life balance, and lack of confidence in the company and leadership (Meyers). According to Susan Heathfield (Heathfield, 2007), most employees are leaving their work for reasons of searching new opportunities with other companies.Three top reasons were identified by Heathfield fifty three portion of employees look for better rewards and benefits, thirty five percent were discontented with prospects of career growth and development, and thirty two percent were ready for a new experience and new environment. The motivating factors that can enhance the nonstop stay of employees were examined by Bob Losyk on his article, here are the different factors that he stated dignity and respect, involvement and participation, pay above the industry average, suit superior workers, and by showing support to employees (Losyk).Giving dignity and respect is one of the most important key elements in satisfying the employees, harsh words, shouting, insults, and evil of power will only result to demoralization, low morale, increase possibilities of absenteeism, and in turn resignation. Losyk added that employers should be treated with high respect, worth and goodness, let them relax, be breakaway and empowered. Do not crash on people who make mistakes instead make it to a great extent constructive and let them learn from it.Involvement and participation is in any case a significant factor in dealing with employees motivation to stay in the company, by listening to their suggestions, aspirations, and ideas can make them more involved and dynamical much as with belongingness and partnership. Paying above the industry average will surely and literally compensate the best employee thus giving and making more money for you. Great employees should be compensated for what they gave back to the company and it should not be as simple as paying back but to reward and constantly recognize their efforts.For sure, companies who have the best employees will have more satisfied clients because of the excellent services they receive and in return a greater chance of repeat business will likely to come. Another tip from Losyk is to highlight and draw attention to outstanding employees by giving awards, certificates, extra remuneration, dinners as well as posting their photos on bulletin boards or company newsletters. To share and show support, to listen and know their personal and family problems can be a key factor for lasting relationship with employees.It will create a positive and motivating atmosphere resulting to a more productive and high-quality employees (Losyk). Increasing demand for immigrant workforce and opportunities abroad The increasing demand of hiring cross-cultural workforce is a global necessity to respond the needs internationally. But because of the terms and conditions in hiring immigrants, it is very(prenominal) difficult to establish a worthy and constant employee for a particular business due to numerous alternative employment with other companies.To better take in the recruitment, hiring and retaining the best employees especially the immigrants and ethnic workers, it is important that we should consider the culture, traditions, and beliefs, know the different ethnic lifestyles and values, appreciate the impact that the immigrant workforce is influencing the management, and study the fabrications on recruitment of different ethnic groups.In addition to Losyks article, he stressed that it is significant that companies must regard the needs and desires most Hispanic and Asian workers want from a workplace, discover how to give comment to immigrant employees, determine the critical factors needed to train Asian, Hispanic and other cross-cultural groups, and create management techniques that can work and understand the involvement and recognition with the ethnic groups (Losyk).Further problems encountered by other employers is when their employees who are assigned to work overseas over a period of time will transfer to another companies in a few months to seek greener pastures. These are real and actual happenings in most development organizations when workers or volunteers enter into a contract to gain experience overseas and marked it as a stepping stone to find great opportunities abroad.How can companies and organizations struggle to this concurrent problem? Is this near a cycle to be left out and find new workers to continue the job? Are there any other holistic delegacy that we can manage to surpass this continuing global recruitment problem?

Konigsberg Bridge Problem

Konigsberg Bridge ProblemThe earliest theme on represent theory seems to be by Leonard Euler,Solutio problematic ad situs pertinentis,Commentarii Academetarii Scientiarum Imperia tend Petropolitanae 8 (1736),128-140.Euler discusses whether or not it is possible to scroll around Konigsberg(later c some(prenominal)ed the Pregolya exactly once. Euler gave the conditions which are necessary to permit such a stroll. Thomas Pennyngton Kirkman (1856) and Wiliam romish Hamilton (1856) studied trips which certain sites exactly once.History of Euler roadways and star shotsAn Eulerian way of life is a highway in a chart which visits each edge exactly once in the theory graph .so, in the same way, an Eulerian circuit is an Eulerian style which starts and ends on the same flush. They were first discussing by Leohard Eular while solving the famous Seven tie of Konigsberg problem in 1736. Mathematically the problem can be stated like thisGiven the graph on the right, is it possible to construct a path (or a wheel around for example, a path starting and ending on the same height) which visits each edge exactly onceGraphs which allow the manufacture of so called Eulerian cycles are called Eulerian graphs. Euler observed that a necessary condition for the existence of Eulerian cycles is that all vertices in the graph have an even stagecoach, and that for an Eulerian path either all, or all but two (i.e., the two endpoint) vertices have an even degree this means the Konigsberg graph is not Eulerian. Carl Heierholzer published the first complete characterization of Eulerian graphs in 1873, by proving that in fact the Eulerian graphs are exactly the graphs which are connected and where every flower has an even degree.Example employ euler in our daily life is development in the teaching for set theory that widely put on in the schools. An opposite example is to visualizing file system organization.it bequeath allows files to appear in more(prenominal) than one directory in a computers file system.The history of the KonigsbergLeonhard Euler (1707-1783) is considered to have been the father of graph theory. His paper in 1736 on the heptad couples of Konigsberg is considered to have been the foundational paper in the subject.Konigsberg is a town, founded in 1256, that was originally in Prussia. After a stormy history, the town became part of Soviet Union and was renames Kaliningrad in 1946. In any event, during Eulers time the town had seven bridges (named Kramer, Schmiede, Holz, Hohe, Honig, Kottel, and Grunespanning) spanning the Pregel River. Figure 8.1 gives a simplified picture of how the bridges were originally configured (two of the bridges were later destroyed during ball War II, and two other demolished by the Russians.History of HamiltonianHamiltonian is introduced by Sir William Rowan Hamilton at 1857. He made a game called around the dry land and the originally in form of solid called dodecahedron. It has 20corners/for each c orner, it called as town. The problem started when the travel started from one city to another city along the edge to receive at city by pull ahead once arrived at one city. This is how the Hamiltonian is appearing. There is example of using Hamiltonian in life such as no-complete, n-cube and change of location salesman problem.Two types of Hamiltonian are Hamiltonian path and Hamiltonian cycleIntroductionPathPath is the chronological sequences of alternating vertices and edges. Which begin from a vertex and ended with a vertex. from each one vertex is preceded and followed by its endpoints.Simple pathSimple path is a path such that all its vertices and edges are distinct.Below is a graph that gives differences between path and simple path.Path 1 v,b,x,h,z(simple path)Path 2 u,c, w,f,y,g,x,e,d,v(path)Example of path is the way of bus direction from one destination to another destination. In other hand, simple path is a path that no complicated for example the direction from f aculty of FTSM to faculty of FUU.CycleCircle is a circular sequence of alternating vertices and edges. Each edges is preceded and followed by its endpoints.Simple cycleSimple cycle is a cycle such that all its vertices and edges are distinct.Cycle u,c,w,e,x,g,f,w,d,v,a,uSimple cyclev,b,x,g,y,f,w,c,u,a,v,Example of using cycle in life is when we travel to another place then come back to our home with using the different ways. some other example in ukm is the bus ways for example bus zone 2 will make a circle to take student and will come back to the initial location where the busy will take a rest.For simple cycle, we always see in sport, such as the tourist court for athletes running especially in event of 400 * 100 meters. Then, we also can see in power plant program that is simple cycle power plant (pp) program. It gives much benefit such as optimized design, reduced engineering costs, short lead times, increase availability and fast startups also mellow operational flexibility .Connected GraphConnected graph is a graph that there exists a path between all pairs of vertices.If a graph is a directed graph, there exist a path between vertexes to each other that in the graph, is called as strongly connected graph.The examples of disconnected graphsExample of using connected graph is use in building. For example Menara Berkembar Petronas, there is a bridge to connect the two buildings. another(prenominal) example is the bridge of Pulau Pinang. First use to connect the island and peninsular Malaysia.Example of disconnected graph is other hand than connected graph. For example the building of one employee is not connected by bridge with another employee. Next, the Island of Sipadan is not connected by a bridge with Borneo land.An Euler path in a graph is a path which traverses each edge of the graph exactly once. An Euler cycle is an Euler path which is contains cycle. If there are no loop graphs, without isolated vertices, the continuation of an Euler path impl ies the connected of the graph, since traversing every edge of such a graph requires visiting each vertex at least once.But, when the connected graph has an Euler path, one can be constructed by applying Fleurys algorithm. A connected graph has an Euler path if it has exactly zero or two vertices of odd degree. If every vertex has even degree, the graph has an Euler cycle.The definition and properties of Euler paths, cycles and graphs are valid for multigraph as well.The seven bridge of KonigsbergIn Konigsberg, Germany, a river ran through the city such that in its centre was an island, and after passing the island, the river broke into two parts. Seven bridges were built, so that the people of the city could get from one part to another part. A crude map of the centre of Konigsberg might look like thisThe people wondered whether or not, one could walk around the city in a way that would involve crossing each bridge exactly once.Degree of vertex border of degree of vertex in graph t heory is the number of edges which connected to a vertex. Degree of vertex also known as local degree. The list of all degree of vertex is called as degree sequences. One way to find the number of vertex is count the number of degree for each vertex that endpoint. An easy way is draw a circle around the vertex and count the number of edges that cross the circle. The degree of vertex can be add together or even. if the degree of vertex is even, it is known as degree vertex and the other hand, if the degree of vertex is odd, the vertex is called an odd vertex. To find out the degree of graph is by choose the largest degree of vertex. Example graph with have odd and even vertexExample degree of vertex is application of carrousel because there are many roads that connected. Either the value is odd or even. The road can be representing as edges and the roundabout as the vertex. Another example is the number of use degree of vertex in electrical pole such as the number of wire connected to the one pole.Hamiltonian pathHamiltonian path is also called as traceable path. Hamiltonian path is a path that visits each vertex exactly one and not ingeminate for each vertex in a graph. Hamiltonian graph us use to solve a problem when find a path that only visited each vertex only one in a graph.Hamiltonian cycleHamiltonian cycle is a cycle that goes through the entire city (vertex) only once for a graph. It cannot be repeated to reach a city for a one cycle except the starting and the ended city.Results of research and real world examplesGraphs can be use to represent oil flow in pipes, traffic flow on motorways, transport of pollution by rivers, groundwater movement of contamination, biochemical pathways, and the underground network.The example of Euler pathThere are many effective applications to Euler circuits and paths. Networks can be use to solve many difficult problems, like the Konigsberg Bridge problem. The can also used by mail carrier who wants to have a route where they do not retrace any of their previous steps. Other than that, Euler circuits and paths are also useful to painters, garbage collector, airplanes pilots and world navigators. Below are the examples of how Euler circuit and paths are useful in the real world.The maps that pilots use are called route maps. The route maps show the paths of the airplanes from one destination to another. Here is an example of actual route map. The centre for all travel with this airline is in Denver, Colorado. From there, we can travel to some of the major cities in the surrounding states.The Navigation below is a trip to see all different regions of the world.The above regions of the world have all been given different colors. Each region also has been given marked with a node or vertex and some (but not all) of the regions are connected with arcs.Conclusions and recommendationsAs the conclusion towards this incident project, the study of graphs and their properties is a classical subject in close to computer science department around the world. Graph Theory can be further exploited by object-oriented software engineering, taking advantage of recent research in various fields. Other than that, Graph theory is one of the top reasons to specify linear Algebra. So, all graphs (included directed, weighted, and multi-graphs) can be represented intuitive by adjency matrices, and matrix operations often end up being meaningful in terms of graph they represent. Seeing the connection between a graph and its matrix helps to understand both of them, and being able to switch back and frontward between mental models is often useful.For example, a person in many fields of modeling, are mostly easily thought of the weight graphs, and are most easily manipulated as matrices. By learning the entire graph, the student can get many benefits by it especially the computer science student. So, our recommendation towards this division in order to make the student easy to learn and improve themselves are for example, shoot the student to make a lot of exercise. Other than that, ask them to make an assignment about this topic. So that the student can search many information based on this topic and become more well-known(prenominal) and understand about graph theory

Criticisms of Utilitarianism

Criticisms of UtilitarianismEssentially, usefulism holds that the correct course of actuateion is that which result create the superlative level of happiness. Bentham called this the greatest happiness principle or the greatest felicity principle. He wrote the greatest happiness of all those whose interests argon in question, as being right and proper, and notwithstanding right and proper and universally desirable, end of human action.Utilitarians seek an empirical basis for goodity through the meterment of happiness. The question that a useful will ask himself is will this, of all possible actions, contribute most to the command happiness? Happiness is seen as the only thing that is good in itself and sorrow the only thing that is bad in itself.Utilitarianism has broadly been categorised as either act utilitarianism, which is the form upon which Bentham founded his hypotheses and rule utilitarianism, which was developed by John Stuart Mill. doing utilitarianism envisages that the best course of action in any given situation is the act that will result in the greatest utility (i.e. the greatest benefit). endure utilitarianism, on the other hand, holds that the correct course of action is that which follows the general rule which gives rise to the greatest utility. So, for example, it might be justifiable in terms of act utilitarianism for a group of friends to rob a person and share the money between themselves, but if this was to be the rule applied in each much(prenominal)(prenominal) situation then the effect on society as a whole would be such as to outweigh any happiness created by the act.CRITICISMS OF UTILITARIANISM Intuitively speaking, utilitarianism appears to be an extremely attractive philosophy. It offers a simplicity that many a(prenominal) other philosophical approaches lack and in particular cuts through the mish mash of moral rules favoured by deontological thinkers. It is reconcilable with the majoritarianism favoured by democra tic systems of government. Moreover, utilitarianism offers an obvious answer to the question of why we should act in a certain way in the absence of a religious justification.Despite this, the theory has attracted copious criticism. On a practical level, utilitarianism has been derided as unworkable, and as yet absurd. It has been advocated that there is no adequate means of formation happiness, nor any suitable method for quantifying levels of happiness. Even if the theory can be made to work on a practical level, others argue, the results are morally wrong. Others aspiration to the reduction of the human experience to the pursuit of pleasure.The various criticisms are too numerous and intricate to discuss in detail here and as such I will confine my discussion to two criticisms that are particularly prevalent in philosophical literature the first relating to practical problems in applying the utilitarian concept and the second dealing with concerns arising from the results of utilitarian analysis.(1) Impossibility the untenability of the felicific calculus One of the most obvious problems with utilitarianism is that happiness, which lies at the heart of the theory, is an abstract concept. How can we hope to measure a quality that exists only in our minds? Furthermore, if we cannot measure happiness, how can we tell the effects that an action will realize on the amount of happiness at heart a society?Bentham proposed a mathematical formula for calculating how an action will affect levels of happiness, which he called the felicific calculus, or utility calculus. In Chapter 4 of An origin to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, Bentham sets out his formula in detail. In spite of this attempt at mathematisation, it is clear, as Smart points out, that the weighing of consequences seems more often a emergence of vague intuition than of scientific calculation. The felicific calculus cannot really account for different degrees of happiness nor of the f act that different people are made happy by different things, and to different degrees. It cannot scan the minds of the population and know for certain what will increase their happiness.It is often impossible to predict take down what the consequences of an action will be, so any attempt to predict the effects on happiness are presumably equally unfeasible. For example, a utilitarian might argue that, if it were possible to journey back in time, then it would be entirely permissible to murder Hitler in order to prevent the deaths of millions of people. However, it is impossible for us to know what the results of this would have been. perhaps an even more wicked dictator would win power in his place and this could result in the suffering and death of twice as many people.Based on this difficulty, Bernard Williams, among others, ridicules the felicific calculus as absurd. He argues that utilitarians would be trapped in an eternal process of calculation in an effort to determine a ny tiny consequence of their actions. One utilitarian response to this accusation is that utilitarian calculations should be carried out subject to reasonable limits. If the calculation procedure was left to sound on ad infinitum then it in itself would become too costly and would itself outweigh the benefits to be derived from the calculation. Allison said that utilitarians should adopt the summary rules approach taken by Rawls in A Theory of Justice. A pragmatic approach seems reasonable.J S Mill argued that, although the calculations were crucial, they have already been carried out in the whole previous(prenominal) duration of the human species and have now come to form part of our moral rules. Therefore, we do not require to sit calculating the outcome of every action before we make it. Of course, to some extent it will be possible to tell instinctively what will result in the greatest happiness. Unfortunately, this does quite an inframine the empirical approach that utilita rians seem to be aiming for. In any event, the felicific calculus is unconvincing as a tool of genuine usefulness and even modern utilitarians appear to have come to reject it.(2) Conflict with the concept of individual rights Utilitarianism, as has previously been remarked upon, is primarily concerned with the interests of the majority of the community. This is anathema to those who reassert the concept of individual rights as paramount.Dworkin, for example, believed that rights are trumps that overwhelm all other moral considerations. Although he noted the apparent egalitarian and impartial nature of utilitarianism, and acknowledge that utilitarian line of business not only respects, but embodies, the right of each citizen to be treated as the equal of any other he goes on to point out that this was deceptive and could easily lead to the infringement of individual rights. He gives the example of how racial segregation might be warrant under the happiness principle on the basis that segregation might be of benefit to a white law student as it would protect his interests even though a minority would suffer. Dworkin neatly summarises his position when he writes If someone has a right to do something then it is wrong for the government to try to get over it to him even though it would be in the general interest to do so.It has been argued that the consequentialist nature of theory means that all manner of rights violations and atrocities might be justified by utilitarian analysis. If the end justifies the means then, to give a topical example, is it acceptable to torture a terrorist in order to obtain information as to the whereabouts of a bomb? Is it acceptable to torture his family to pressurise the terrorist into talking? If the torture results in the finding of a bomb, which is then defused, saving many lives, then the utilitarian position would presumably support the torture in both cases. Rights-based theorists, on the other hand, would consider tortu re to be a violation of the terrorists rights that could never be justified. Moreover, at an instinctive level the average person would be revolted at the thought of torture, if not of the terrorist then certainly of the terrorists family. It is difficult to see how utilitarianism can be reconciled with human instinct in such circumstances.A rule-utilitarian would seek to circumvent this problem by arguing that torture, if applied as a general rule, would have such a detrimental effect on society that its use cannot be justified under the greatest happiness principle. Torture in a single situation might be justified, but the fear and shame that would arise in the community at large as a result of a widely used policy of torture would outweigh the immediate benefit in this situation. John Stuart Mill also argued that there was utilitarian value in the protection of rights, since this would increase overall happiness. This is a compelling argument. The act-utilitarian, however, would seemingly be bound to accept the torture as morally legitimate. What, then, of large atrocities? It could be argued that a consequentialist approach has been used to justify many of the worlds worst crimes against humanity. Smart concedes that, under a strict utilitarian analysis, it would be justifiable to manage suffering and death to a large number of people on the grounds that an even larger number would ultimately benefit. However, he points out that it would be necessary in utilitarian terms to be very sure that the future generation would benefit and, since it would almost certainly be impossible to be so certain of the future, utilitarianism would not in fact sanction the atrocity. Moreover, he says, even if we could predict the future with absolute certainty, the chance that a large-scale atrocity would result in a benefit of sufficient scale to outweigh the horror it causes is so remote that utilitarians would almost certainly condemn the atrocity.Unfortunately, this def ensive argument serves to re-iterate one of the criticisms previously alluded to allude namely, the difficulties inherent in predicting the consequences of ones actions. By admitting that we cannot predict the outcome of, for example, genocide, Smart leaves utilitarian theory open to the accusation that there are many actions for which we cannot predict the outcome, which would suggest that it is too risky to ever take any action at all. Smart confesses that a utilitarian may have to confess doubt and ignorance is of course in accordance with his empirical attitude, however this seems to be passing the buck somewhat given the staunchly empirical customs that underlies utilitarianism.CONCLUSION The classical conception of utilitarianism as presented by its early adherents is certainly flawed and, with such keystone concepts as the felicific calculus having been undermined, it might appear that utilitarianism as a philosophical position is otiose. Moreover, it is difficult to see whe re utilitarianism can sit comfortably within our contemporary culture of individual rights and freedoms. Modern utilitarians, however, continue to argue their corner. Raymond Frey, also quoted by Allison, argues that utilitarianism has never ceased to occupy a central place in moral theorising and has come to have a significant impact on the thinking of many laymen. The actions of governments, both in this country and abroad, in response to a perceived increase in the threat of terrorism is arguably evidence to extent to which utilitarianism influences current political thinking. Of course, it may be some time before we discover whether these actions are ultimately successful in terms of the maximisation of happiness or whether they have the opposite effect.

History Of The Existence Of God Philosophy Essay

History Of The Existence Of divinity Philosophy EssayAfter reading Anselms Proslogion, a person could be convinced of the humans of a supreme being, based on the onto ordered argument he provides. Anselm claims that there exists a being that which nothing greater kitty be thought. He is referring to immortal and shows how the simple mind of divinity in ones mind proves that God exists because it is that which nothing greater asshole be thought. An idea that exists solely in the mind and not in reality is not as great as an idea, which exists in twain. Since God is the greatest being, God must exist in our minds as well as in reality.If a person had read the commencement ceremony of the five ways presented by doubting Thomas doubting Thomas in the Summa of Theology and his Summa Against the Heathens, this person could be convinced of a divine being through the proof of an unmoved mover, who doubting Thomas conveys as God. The first of the five ways that Aquinas uses to prove the globe of God is related to motion. Aquinas says that some object lenss in the cosmos argon in motion. These objects must be moved by another object in motion. From that, he provokes the deduction that there is a long chain of movers that not only move objects simply also ar moved by objects before them. Since the chain cannot go to infinity, there must be some unmoved mover that starts the chain and Aquinas concludes this being to be God.We will c alone the two previous convictions A, representing Anselm and T, representing Thomas Aquinas. Also, we will refer to G as the conviction that God exists. Together both convictions, A and T, are not equivalent to G. A and T both take different routes in proving G nevertheless are flawed in their own ways.Take for example A by itself, which is not equal to G. From individual to individual, there can be different notions of the word God. For example, take an idea of a sports car that which nothing greater can be thought. Two diffe rent people may maintain two very different ideas of what makes a sports car the greatest. The use of the word greatest in the argument is left for individual interpretation and also exclusively the thought of the greatest sports car does not regard as that it exists. Simply conceiving the greatest of whateverthing does not result in its existence. If everyone had the same definition of God, a stronger case for A equaling G could be made and we know this not to be true. Anselms argument works under special circumstances but cannot be extended for every case.T by itself is not equal to G. Strictly speaking, T simply provides reasoning for a being that is an unmoved mover, not an powerful deity. However, Aquinas attributes this being to God but it can just as easily be attributed to any other being. Applying Aquinass principle that motion of an object must be received from a moving object before that object, the argument would result in infinity. If God is the first unmoved move r to start the motion of objects, the notion of God contradicts Aquinas foundation that all movers must be moved.An ordinary conception of God is a supreme being that is all good, omniscient, and powerful. Given such a conception, the conviction represented by A partially fails to be equivalent to it because of the various assumptions that Anselm makes in his ontological proof. Anselm references the greatest being, that which nothing greater can be thought, however, this does not necessarily mean that this being is omniscient, omnipotent, or other qualities that are included in an ordinary conception of God. This is due to the simple fact that a persons interpretation of greatness or idea of greatest may or may not grasp these qualities. Consider the common mans knowledge for a great basketball player. Some would comport that this person would be extremely tall. Using Anselms proof for the greatest basketball player that can be thought, each persons idea could be potentially diff erent from the next. Some may define the greatest as the quickest or the best at shooting while others would agree that it would be the tallest man. This failure to be equivalent is only a partial failure because some may have the same definition as the ordinary conception while others would have a different definition.T partially fails to be equivalent to the ordinary conception of God as well but is closer to equivalence than A. In the first of Aquinas five ways, he simply proves a being that is a mover that is not moved. This can be interpreted to be an omnipotent being because it breaks away from the assumption that all objects that can move must be moved by another object before it. Only an all-powerful being would be able to be the unmoved mover. The first of the five ways does not embody the other ordinary conceptions of God in any way. However, if we were to expand our prior knowledge which led us to conviction T from just including the first way to including all five ways t hen we are closer to equivalence. Each of the five ways proves a different feature that a being could have which can be juxtaposed with the ordinary conceptions of god. Aquinas is closer to proving the existence of God with his five ways in comparison with Anselms ontological proof.We will refer to the limited espousal that David Hume acknowledges for natural theology, as H. H is not directly equivalent to A or T, or both together because H is built upon the premise that analogies cannot be extended to the existence of God. A and T both conclude with statements that recognize the existence of God. Strictly speaking, Hume would not agree with A or T, therefore H does not equal A or T. Hume does however agree with the fact that if the arguments, A or T, are convincing enough, then they can be extended to human intelligence but not any further.H captures less of what people ordinarily take the word God to mean. Hume does not suggest anywhere in his limited acceptance of natural theolo gy about the existence of God or any of the ordinary notions that are associated with God. Since he does not accept the existence of God as deduced by natural theology, his statement, H, does not bear any similarity to the ordinary conception of God. To a certain extent, A and T do acknowledge God and based on individual interpretation capture what the word God incorporates. Therefore, H captures less of the ordinary notion of God then A or T. Philosophers have yet to agree upon a definitive answer to whether God exists or not and each one provides their own argument. Each argument has its strengths and weaknesses and ultimately, we handle to work to find the answer.Word Count 937Problem of EvilThe challenge issued by Gretchen Weirob in John Perrys Dialogue on Good, Evil and the Existence of God is directed towards surface-to-air missile Miller. Not only does Gretchen want Sam to prove to her the existence of God, but also Gods coexistence with villainy in the natural world. A no -hit answer to this challenge would be a clear and proficient proof for how a perfect God can exist and can create a world where there is evil. Sam starts arguing that God has a grand picture plan for the universe, which includes necessary evil and imperfections for the greater good. Gretchen does not buy into his big picture argument and in order to prove the big picture, Sam presents her with a three-part theodicy.The first part discusses free will, where Sam says that creatures and beings have the option to make good choices or bad ones and the path that they choose is entirely up to them. Consider the choice a student makes between cheating on a test and studying diligently. The decision that he makes is up to him because he has free will. Gretchen is not convinced and does not believe that an all-good God can exist because of this reason.Sam counters with the second part, which considers the notion of the afterlife where God does justice for all the wrongs that are done in the world. For example, a flawed justice system could result in a criminal not being punished for his crime or an innocent man taking the fall for something the man has not done. In the afterlife, God, an all-fair and just being, would punish the criminal and reward the innocent man. Gretchen provides examples for evils that are not caused or controlled by humans and Sam has an answer for that as well.The final part deals with the existence of devils, which causes anguish and pain through natural phenomenon. This encompasses the remaining evil in the world that is not directly an effect of free will. For example, a tsunami that wipes out some cities is not something a human can control and it is explained by the will of the devils.These various ideas and the examples that defend them offer a comforting response to how evil can exist in the world created by a supreme being. Sams theodicy is difficult to argue with as he provides examples and observations in the natural world that even tually encompass all kinds of evil in the world. Gretchen is unable to have intercourse up with any more counter-examples or scenarios of evil in the world and she admits that Sam has provided a satisfactory response to her challenge.In David Humes Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, Philo claims the idea of such a Deity is consistent with the nature of the world. God formed the world and everything in it. Therefore, a logical parallel to draw is between the nature of the world and the nature of God. Philos argument could answer Gretchens challenge because she is simply looking for a possible explanation not necessarily a feasible one. As long as Gretchen is provided an explanation for how God can exist alongside the evidence of so much evil in the world, she will treat this as a satisfactory response.However, there is good and evil in the world and given this nature, we cannot infer that God exists. Since our world is not perfect, our evidence and observations cannot be used as a root for the argument of Gods existence. For example, if a vehicle were to collide with an innocent pedestrian, an all-perfect God would not only know it was going to happen but also could have prevented it from happening in the first place. We can extend this example to all grief in the world and dismiss any understanding of God that comes from the world. If a perfect deity were to create a perfect world, we could use that evidence to prove the existence of such a deity.In my opinion, the inability to make this inference would hinder Philos ability to meet Gretchens challenge because he would be unable to prove to her that a supreme benevolent being exists. Philo explains four hypotheses for the possible nature of God perfectly good, completely evil, good and evil, and neither good nor evil. The first two are immediately thrown out because of the natural world has both good and evil therefore God has to somehow embody both forces. The third scuttle is viewed by many as two sepa rate beings, one representing good and another representing evil. If this were the case, then our world would be caught in a struggle and this is not evident simply observing what happens on Earth. What we can see is regardless of the nature of a person, that person is subject to the laws of nature. For example, a thief and a bounty worker living in a city could both lose their homes because of a hurricane. Their individual nature has nothing to do with whether the hurricane will affect them or not. God set up these laws of nature to affect everyone. Therefore, God is neither good nor evil.At best, Philo would prove to Gretchen about neither an all-good, nor an all-evil God, rather a indifferent one. Gretchen would not be entirely convinced because her definition of God along with the general consensus is that God is all-good. The only assumptions for a possible existence of God come from what we can observe and the problem of evil in the world is a definite deterrent in proving t his to be true.

La Investigación de Mercados :: Los Ensayos

En el siguiente ensayo se va a analizar el impacto de la Investigacin de Mercados en la toma de decisiones empresariales. La Investigacin de Mercados siempre ha sido una tarea que ha favorecido a los encargados de las compaas a examinar el entorno, controlar la actividad de su empresa pero sobre todo en la toma de decisiones. El objetivo de la investigacin de mercados consiste en satisfacer las necesidades de informacin y proporcionar a la gerencia con informacin actualizada, relevante, exacta fiable y vlida (Malhotra, 1997). Por lo tanto la investigacin de mercados impulsa el crecimiento empresarial aportando informacin significativa, ya que las decisiones apropiadas no se basan en intuicin, juicio de intrepidity o sexto sentido (Merino, 2010).En la actualidad la investigacin de mercados es una necesidad fundamental en el mbito empresarial. Esto se debe a que independientemente de la actividad que la empresa realice, es esencial conocer las caractersticas que tiene el mercado dond e se quiere entrar o en aquel que ya se esta operando. Las estrategias de competencia, las motivaciones, los hbitos de compra y las tendencias del entorno, son algunos de los elementos que requieren de previo conocimiento parity que la administracin tome decisiones adecuadas para el diseo y curso de su actividad (Castillo, 1999). Los tres principales aspectos para que una empresa adopten una investigacin de mercados, son los siguientes En primer lugar por la extensin de mercados, en la actualidad los mercados que se atienden son cada vez ms amplios por lo que es ms difcil alcanzarlos. La segunda se concentra en el cambio de las necesidades, ya que las organizaciones no pueden concentrarse nicamente en producir aquello que la gente necesita, sino tambin en aquello que los clientes desean, tomando en cuenta sus gustos y preferencias. Y finalmente porque ahora, el precio no es el nico factor determinante para los consumidores, al momento de realizar una compra, hay otras factores qu e influyen como las marcas, estatutos y el prestigio de las mismas (Castillo, 1999). Los tres objetivos primordiales por los cuales la investigacin de mercados es necesaria para evitar errores en el proceso de toma de decisiones, se basa en tres distintos mbitos. En primer lugar en el mbito social, esta relacionado con conocer al consumidor, saber cuales son sus necesidades, costumbres, motivaciones y deseos. Para poder ajustar el plan de negocios a los consumidores es indispensable conocerlos y hacer un buen estudio de mercado.

The Pride of Sophocles Oedipus The King Essay -- Oedipus the King Oe

The Pride of Sophocles Oedipus The King Greek tragedy is characterized by the emotional catharsis brought about by the horrific suffering of a deluxe figure. In Oedipus The King, by Sophocles, the onslaught of pain assailing the protagonist is a reply of his tragic flaw. Sophocles often used a characters hamartia to alter or crook the outcome or future of the hero. Oedipus hubris traps him to fulfil the oracle and intensifies his punishment. Oedipus pride is an immanent characteristic. Even before his glory and power as King of Thebes he allowed his conceit to cloud his judgement and rule his actions. Unknowingly, Oedipus fulfills Apollos oracle when he encounters a fate of men at a crossroad. The driver offends Oedipus as he brushes by, inciting Oedipus anger. Although the contact is expert a slight intrusion, Oedipus, outraged that someone would have the gall to anesthetize him paid them back with interest and killed everyone of them, every mothers son. In hindsight as h e recounts the incident to Jocasta he is not remorseful for the loss of life nor for his share in the crime. Instead, Oedipus tone is one of satisfaction that he got revenge. Had his arrogance not interfered, Oedipus would not have made the rash decision to kill all of the companionship and would not have satisfied the prophecy. Oedipus self-confidence blinds him to the impossibility evading fate predestined by the gods. Dramatic irony is present when Oedipus tries to skirt the horrible prophecy of him sidesplitting his father and coupling with his mother, because in fleeing Corinth to avoid murdering Polybus, he is taking steps that pass on realize the prophecy. Again his overconfidence contributes to the impending doom in accept t... ...o torture the shepherd, So you wont talk willingly - then youll talk with pain. Oedipus rigourousness indeed literally squeezes his own demise out of the shepherd Youre a dead man is I have to ask again. Again, Oedipus is blind to the kee n hints the shepherd leaves for Oedipus to decipher. Until now, Oedipuss pride has blinded him from the truth and from seeing others intentions he has been stubborn. When isolated, individually of these events may be excused as a simple mistake, but a pattern emerges when viewed as a whole. The tragic outcome of Oedipus life is caused by his underlying character flaw - pride. However, Oedipus is a tragic hero because he becomes cognizant of his fault and accepts responsibility for his actions. Works Cited Sophocles. The Three Theban Plays (pp.159-251). Penguin Classics.New York, New York1984. The Pride of Sophocles Oedipus The King Essay -- Oedipus the King OeThe Pride of Sophocles Oedipus The King Greek tragedy is characterized by the emotional catharsis brought about by the horrific suffering of a heroic figure. In Oedipus The King, by Sophocles, the onslaught of pain assailing the protagonist is a result of his tragic flaw. Sophocles often used a character s hamartia to alter or influence the outcome or future of the hero. Oedipus hubris traps him to fulfil the oracle and intensifies his punishment. Oedipus pride is an innate characteristic. Even before his glory and power as King of Thebes he allowed his conceit to cloud his judgement and rule his actions. Unknowingly, Oedipus fulfills Apollos oracle when he encounters a band of men at a crossroad. The driver offends Oedipus as he brushes by, inciting Oedipus anger. Although the contact is just a slight intrusion, Oedipus, outraged that someone would have the gall to trouble him paid them back with interest and killed everyone of them, every mothers son. In hindsight as he recounts the incident to Jocasta he is not remorseful for the loss of life nor for his part in the crime. Instead, Oedipus tone is one of satisfaction that he got revenge. Had his arrogance not interfered, Oedipus would not have made the rash decision to kill all of the party and would not have satisfied the proph ecy. Oedipus self-confidence blinds him to the impossibility evading fate predestined by the gods. Dramatic irony is present when Oedipus tries to skirt the horrible prophecy of him killing his father and coupling with his mother, because in fleeing Corinth to avoid murdering Polybus, he is taking steps that will realize the prophecy. Again his overconfidence contributes to the impending doom in believing t... ...o torture the shepherd, So you wont talk willingly - then youll talk with pain. Oedipus cruelty indeed literally squeezes his own demise out of the shepherd Youre a dead man is I have to ask again. Again, Oedipus is blind to the subtle hints the shepherd leaves for Oedipus to decipher. Until now, Oedipuss pride has blinded him from the truth and from seeing others intentions he has been stubborn. When isolated, each of these events may be excused as a simple mistake, but a pattern emerges when viewed as a whole. The tragic outcome of Oedipus life is caused by his unde rlying character flaw - pride. However, Oedipus is a tragic hero because he becomes aware of his fault and accepts responsibility for his actions. Works Cited Sophocles. The Three Theban Plays (pp.159-251). Penguin Classics.New York, New York1984.