Interpreting Popular Music Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Interpreting Popular Music - Essay Example Lastly, of every significant structure, music has maybe the most unpretentious and complex connection to verbal dialect and the sorts of referentiality in which it is (customarily) related. The state of it being rich, makes music a vital source-case for a basic semiotics. Nevertheless, it is likewise this richness, which has regularly separated musical semiotics into contending camps, each one deficient. I ought to pause a minute, then, to show the general blueprints of the new amalgamation which, I believe, can at long last start to address this many-sided quality. There are three key improvements in musical semiotics in the 1990s. The principal was a basic swing in the field far from formalism for its own particular purpose, towards a recharged enthusiasm for hermeneutics (but of a profoundly formalized sort). The hermeneutic turn has given room for musical semiotics to say significantly more in regards to the particular connections between cultural value and formal detail. The second advancement was the development of an intelligible and effective hypothesis of musical gesture a vastly improved picture of the associations between musics symbolic and corporeal aspects, and the inconspicuous interplay in the middle of literal and progressively abstract signs of encapsulation in musical practice. This advancement has permitted musical semiotics to be more particular about the instruments fundamental musical connotation at all levels of sweeping statement. The third advancement has been the rise of a semiotic hypothesis of musical narrative and musical personae. However, the main aim of this paper is to give a semiotic analysis of aâ€Å"Not a second† a rock song done by the Beatles back in the years. There has been plenty of earnest rock writing -- Heylin 1992 Eisen 1969, and Kureishi 1995- are excellent anthologies. Nevertheless, so far it has largely concentrated on disciplines like music’s sociology, with their theories and concepts rooted in

Law and Morality Essay Example for Free

Law and Morality Essay 1. Criminal law is not (just) for the protection of individuals but also for the protection of society ? Moderate / Disintegration Thesis: 1 The state has power to legislate morality in order to protect itself against behaviors that may disintegrate society and its institutions ? Society â€Å"means a community of ideas; without shared ideas on politics, morals, and ethics no society can exist† (Devlin, 10). ? Devlin appealed to the idea of societys moral fabric. He argued that the criminal law must respect and reinforce the moral norms of society in order to keep social order from unravelling. Society’s morality is a crucial, if not the crucial, element that holds it together ? Societies disintegrate from within more frequently than they are broken up by external pressures. There is disintegration when no common morality is observed and history shows that the loosening of moral bonds is often the first stage of disintegration, so that society is justified in taking the same steps to preserve its moral code as it does to preserve its government the suppression of vice is as much the laws business as the suppression of subversive activities. Devlin, The Enforcement of Morals 36 (1959) ? Extreme/ Conservative Thesis: A society is entitled to enforce its morality in order to preserve its distinctive communal values and way of life HART: Hart critiques Lord Devlin’s first argument by challenging his conception of society â€Å"*He has+ a confused definition of what a society is† (Hart (1962) chapter 82). ? Attack against the Moderate/ Disintegration Thesis ? Hart argues that decriminalizing behavior, which has previously been viewed as immoral behavior, is not necessarily a threat to the society’s long-term cohesion or existence. ? [Devlin] appears to move from the acceptable proposition that some shared morality is essential to the existence of any society to the unacceptable proposition that a society is identical with its morality as that is at any given moment of its history, so that a change in its morality is tantamount to the destruction of a society. (Hart 51-52. Italics in original. ) ? The moderate thesis implies factual claims of the disintegration of society for which Devlin did not provide, and (in Harts view) could not have provided, substantial empirical support. DEVLIN: ? I do not assert that any deviation from a society? s shared morality threatens its existence any more than I assert that any subversive activity threatens its existence. I assert that they are both activities which are capable in their nature of threatening the existence of society so that neither can be put beyond the law . I would venture to assert, for example, that you cannot have a game without rules and that if there were no rules there would be no game. If I am asked whether that means that the game is „identical?with the rules, I would be willing for the question to be answered either way in the belief that the answer would lead to nowhere. If I am 1 (Hart’s term H. L. A. Hart, Social Solidarity and the Enforcement of Morality, The University of Chicago Law Review 35 (1976), pp 1-13]. ) asked whether a change in the rules means that one game has disappeared and another has taken its place, I would reply probably not, but that it would depend on the extent of the change. (Devlin, Morals 37). ? Lord Devlin does not then think that this power should be exercised against every single kind and act of immorality. Society should exercise this power only when the moral sensibility of the majority regarding a given immoral activity rises to the level of profound â€Å"intolerance, indignation, and disgust† (Devlin, Morals 17) ? DWORKIN: If society should not legislate against all immorality, because not all immoral activities and acts endanger its existence, then what standards for evidence and action will be used to justify society’s right to enforce its morality in any given case? The threshold criterion that Lord Devlin offers is public outrage, so it comes out that nothing more than passionate public disapproval is necessary after all!? (Taking Rights Seriously. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1977, p. 245) ? Attack against the Extreme/ Conservative Thesis Hart rejected the extreme thesis on the ground that it potentially justified legal enforcement of moral values, regardless of their content, simply because they were widely held. Such restrictions restrict society from evolving naturally in terms of its citizens’ moral beliefs practices. ? Devlin? s approach of incorporating moral values into the law â€Å"regardless of content, simply because they were widely held† places â€Å"an unjustified brake on changes in [what should be dynamic ] social mores† (Peter Cane 23). DEVLIN: 2. The content of moral legislation should be determined by what he terms â€Å"public morality†. ? This is not merely the majority position that could be determined by a public opinion poll. Public morality is the view held by the â€Å"reasonable man† /â€Å"right-minded man† ? What is acceptable to the ordinary man, the man in the jury box, who might also be called the reasonable man or the right minded man Devlin The Enforcement of Morals 38 (1959) Devlin chose the man in the jury box because: a) The verdict of a jury (12 men and women) must be unanimous (at the time he was writing) b) The jury will only reach its verdict after the issue has been fully examined and deliberated. c) The jury box is the place where the ordinary persons conception of morality is enforced. ? Elsewhere his comments suggest that the content of public morality can be identified by some kind of moral intuition ? It is the power of a common sense and not the power of reason that is behind the judgments of society†¦There is, for example, a general abhorrence of homosexuality. We should ask ourselves in the first instance whether, looking at it calmly and dispassionately, we regard it as a vice so abominable that its mere presence is an offence. If that is the genuine feeling of the society in which we live, I do not see how society can be denied the right to eradicate it (Devlin, Morals 40). ? As DWORKIN phrases the argument: â€Å"In the last analysis the decision must rest on some article of moral faith, and in a democracy this sort of issue must be settled in accordance with democratic principles. (b) It is, after all, the community which acts when the threats and sanctions of the criminal law are brought to bear. The community must take the moral responsibility, and it must therefore act on its own lights – that is, on the moral faith of its members† (Dworkin, 246-247) HART: ? Distinguishes between Positive and Critical Morality Critical Morality: A statement of what is morally true Positive/conventional morality: A statement of what most people believe is morally true. ? Hart argued Devlin always slipped into the Positive Morality approach. The problem is that beliefs about moral matters change. At any given time in a community, there may be a consensus on some moral questions, while on other questions there will be sharp divisions. Over time, an issue may go from being a matter of consensus to being a matter of controversy, and given enough time, an issue which there was a consensus one way may eventually be a matter of consensus the other way. How can we know that our laws are enforcing society’s moral consensus rather than just protecting the last generation’s prejudices against a consensus forming around another position. (Jurisprudence, theory and contextBrian Bix p. 169) ? The Harm Principle Hart’s2 point of inception was Mill’s ‘Harm Principle’: If there are any ‘Critically Moral Rights’ or ‘Natural Rights’ there must be a natural right of every person to be equally free. Therefore â€Å"The only purpose for which power can rightfully be exercised over any member of a civilised community against his will is to prevent harm to others. †3 ? Starting with the liberty-protecting Harm Principle enabled Hart to cast onto Devlin the burden of proof on the issue of the relationship between immorality and social harm. Certainly, Devlin provided no hard evidence to support his assertion that society would be worse off without legal moralism but neither did Hart provide any factual evidence that society would be a better (or, at least, no worse a) place without legal moralism (Peter Cane 31). ? DEVLIN: the fact that consent is not a defence for various harm-based offences showed that the harm principle was not the laws normative foundation. HART: distinction needed to be drawn between moralism and paternalism. Paternalism is justification of interfering with another person against their will, where that person will then be better off or protected from harm. ? DEVLIN: the existence of the crime of bigamy also undermined the harm principle. HART: distinction needed to be drawn between Harm and Offense. What is wrong with Bigamy is its offensiveness to peoples religious sensibilities. ? DEVLIN: We see (moral) wrongfulness taken into account went sentencing, and we do not premise this on harmfulness because otherwise all crimes will be treated alike whether it was done maliciously or otherwise. HART: distinction needed to be drawn between principles of Sentencing and criminal liability. The fact that the moral gravity of an offenders conduct- its wrongfulness as opposed to its harmfulness can be taken into account in sentencing tells us nothing about the relationship between law and morality. [Hart offers no reason why this should be so (Peter Cane 32)] ? To sum up Hart’s position: Everyone has a priori liberty. Cannot exercise that liberty when it infringes (Harm’s) another’s liberty. A change in social institutions is not the sort of harm from which a society has a right to protect itself. A society’s right to act should be restricted to demonstrable and imminent rather than speculated and distant harm. 2 3 Hart, Law, Liberty and Morality, p. 14. John Stuart Mill â€Å"On Liberty† ch. 1 ? Problem: The law seems to have little or nothing to do with the immediate consequences of the criminalized conduct. These include the criminalisation of attempts, offences of risk-creation, and the acceptability of strict and negligence-based criminal liability. (Peter Cane 33) ? In order to protect the ‘Harm Principle’ there are 2 reactions to criminal liability that seem to contradict the requirement of â€Å"Harm† : 1. Any law that is not premised on harm is wrong, should be decriminalized 2. Attempt to rationalize in terms of the harm principle any and every aspect of the criminal law that appears at first sight to be inconsistent with it. This is the strategy adopted by Gardner and Shute in relation to rape, and their approach could be applied more generally to cover risk-creation and attempts, for instance. We might say (as Gardner and Shute say in relation to rape) that a society in which the creation of certain risks was not a crime, or in which attempting and contemplating crimes were not themselves crimes, would be (in some sense) a worse society to live in than one in which they were. A worry about this sort of argument, however, is that it depends on the aggregate effect of many such acts, and does not seem to justify coercion of any individual. ? Classifying such diffuse effects as harm seem[s] to reduce the significance of Mills principle to vanishing point. 4 Reinterpreting the harm principle to encompass such non-individualized harm =(what Hart called) the moderate thesis in different garb! PETER CANE: ‘Taking Law Seriously: Starting Points of the Hart/Devlin Debate’(2006) 10 (1/2) The Journal of Ethics, Vol. 10, No. 1/2 (Jan. , 2006) ? The debate about the limits of the criminal law has become a debate about the meaning of the harm principle and the definition of harm. Devlins approach was better. He asked a nonleading question: what factors ought to be taken into account in deciding whether conduct ought to be criminalised? Harm (however defined) is one such factor. But should it be given lexical priority over other relevant factors? ? It is easy enough to accept Harts idea that freedom is a basic human value. Human beings are individuals, and being able to express that individuality in ones choices and actions is an essential component of human well-being. Alongside the individuality of human beings, however, their other most noticeable characteristic is sociability. It is not just that most people choose to live in (larger or smaller) communities or that most people belong to various overlapping and interacting groups. People are also heavily reliant on those communities and groups, and on their relationships with other human beings. If individual freedom is a precondition of human flourishing so, too, is membership of communities and groups, and a rich network of social interactions. ? The law has many social benefits: We must view the law positively as a set of social resources rather than negatively as a restraint on individual freedom. ? This misconception arises from an unsophisticated picture of criminal penalties that fails to recognize their variety and the varying degrees to which they invade individual autonomy, and impose harsh treatment on and stigmatize the offender. This is, no doubt, partly the result of Harts argument that rules and principles of sentencing are irrelevant to questions about the limits of the criminal law. This is incorrect: Some conduct should not be criminalised at all, no matter what the penalty. But in relation to some conduct, the answer to the question of 4 N. E. Simmonds, Law and Morality, in E. Craig (ed. ), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (London: Routledge, 2004), retrieved 19 May 2004 from http:/ www. rep. routledge. com. whether it should be criminalised will depend on whether a suitable penalty is available. Penalties relate to stigma, and stigma relates to informing a societies interactions. ? The conception of the criminal law and of law in general that underpins the Hart-Devlin debate is what we might call a conception of law as coercion. According to this understanding of law, its prime significance and function is to secure compliance with its norms by threats of coercion and imposition of punishments and other sanctions. Laws coerciveness is seen as the characteristic most relevant to determining its proper limits. This is a deficient understanding of law and its social functions. For the typical, law-abiding citizen the significance of law resides not in its coerciveness but in its normativity. Such a person obeys the law not in order to avoid its coercive sanctions but because they consider obedience to be the preferable or correct course of action. A legal system could not operate effectively if this were not so. In this light, we must question whether a theory of the limits of law based on the assumption that law is seen by those to whom it is addressed as an invasion of their autonomy is likely to be sound. Why should we determine the limits of law by reference to the perspective of the minority of people who obey it only because of its coercive capacity, rather than the perspective of those who view law as a legitimate source of standards of behaviour? If law were viewed from this latter perspective, the idea that it might appropriately prescribe standards of behaviour that express shared social values and aspirations would seem much less objectionable. DWORKIN: Distinguishes between Goal-Based Strategy and Rights-Based Strategy: Goal-Based Strategy: Even if the behavior is bad for the community as a whole, just considered in itself, the consequences of trying to censor or otherwise suppress it would be, in the long run, even worse. Rights-Based Strategy: Even if the behaviour makes the community worse off, even in the very long run, it is nevertheless wrong to censor or restrict it because this violates the individual moral or political rights of citizens who resent the censorship. Favouring the Rights-Based Strategy (p. 194) People have the right not to suffer disadvantage in the distribution of social goods and opportunities, including disadvantage in the liberties permitted to them by the criminal law, just on the ground that their officials or fellow-citizens think that their opinions about the right way for them to lead their own lives are ignoble or wrong. I shall call this the right to moral independence, Justification of the Right to Moral Independence Rights are individual’s trumps5 over a background justification for political decisions that states a goal for the community as a whole. If someone has a right to moral independence, this means that it is for some reason wrong for officials to act in violation of that right, even if they (correctly) believe that the community as a whole would be better off if they did. To some extent, the argument in favour of a particular right must depend on which general background justification for political decisions the right in question proposes to trump. 5 Dworking, Taking Rights Seriously Dworkin assumes that the background justification with which we are concerned is some form of utilitarianism, which takes, as the goal of politics, the fulfilment of as many of peoples goals for their own lives as possible. This is the most prevalent background in Western Democracies. Suppose we accept then that, at least in general, a political decision is justified if it promises to make citizens happier or to fulfil more of their preferences, on average, than any other decision could. Suppose we assume that the decision to prohibit pornography altogether does, in fact, meet that test, because the desires and preferences of publishers and consumers are outweighed by the desires and preferences of the majority, including their preferences about how others should lead their lives. How could any contrary decision, permitting even the private use of pornography, then be justified? A proper understanding of the underlying justification for utilitarianism will itself justify the Right. Utilitarianism owes whatever appeal it has to what we might call its egalitarian nature. Utilitarianism claims that people are treated as equals when the preferences of each, weighted only for intensity, are balanced in the same scales, with no distinctions for persons or merit. Even if the majority’s preference (i. e. that which will make the majority happier) is to disadvantage or to advantage a minority, this is inconsistent with the very essence of utilitarianism , so even if it does result in fulfilment of as many of peoples goals for their own lives as possible, utilitarianism cannot allow that without undermining the philosophy that bore utilitarianism itself. Dworkin’s argument, therefore, comes to this: If utilitarianism is to figure as part of an attractive working political theory, then it must be qualified so as to restrict the preferences that undermine egalitarianism. One very practical way to achieve this restriction is provided by the idea of rights as trumps over unrestricted utilitarianism. The right of moral independence can be defended in a parallel way. Neutral utilitarianism rejects the idea that some ambitions that people might have for their own lives should have less command over social resources and opportunities than others, except as this is the consequence of weighing all preferences on an equal basis in the same scales. It rejects the argument, for example, that some peoples conception of what sexual experience should be like are inherently degrading or unwholesome. But then it cannot (for the reasons just canvassed) count the moral preferences of those who do hold such opinions in the calculation whether individuals who form some sexual minority, including homosexuals and pornographers, should be prohibited from the sexual experiences they want to have. The right of moral independence is part of the same collection of rights as the right of political independence, and it is to be justified as a trump over an unrestricted utilitarian defence of prohibitory laws against pornography. Limitations on the Right: (p. 195) Suppose it is discovered that the private consumption of pornography does in fact significantly increase the danger of crimes of violence, either generally or specifically crimes of sexual violence. Or suppose that private consumption has some special and deleterious effect on the general economy, by causing great absenteeism from work. Then government would have, in these facts, a justification for the restraint and perhaps even for the prohibition of pornography that does not include the offending hypothesis either directly, by the assumption that the hypothesis is true, or indirectly, in the proposition that many people think it true. Can we find a plausible justification for restricting the display of pornography that does not violate the right of moral independence? We can, obviously, construct a certain argument in that direction, as follows. Many people do not like to encounter genital displays on the way to the grocer. This taste is not, nor does it necessarily reflect, any adverse view of the character of those who do not mind such encounters. Another may argue, for example, that his own delight in other peoples bodies is lessened or made less sharp and special if nakedness becomes either too familiar to him or less peculiar to those occasions in which it provides him special pleasure, which may be in museums or his own bedroom or both. Or that sex will come to be different and less valuable for him if he is too often or too forcefully reminded that it has different, more commercial or more sadistic, meaning for others. Or that his goal that his children develop certain similar tastes and opinions will be thwarted by the display or advertising that he opposes. None of these different opinions and complaints must be the product of some conviction that those with other opinions and tastes are people of bad character. The Williams Report: If one accepted, as a basis for coercing one persons actions, the fact that others would be upset even by the thought of his performing those actions, one would be denying any substantive individual liberty at all. 5 5 Report, p. 100. Laws against public sex would generally be thought to be consistent with the harm condition, in the sense that if members of the public are upset, distressed, disgusted, outraged or put out by witnessing some class of acts, then that constitutes a respect in which the public performance of those · acts harms their interests and gives them a reason to object . The offensiveness of publicly displayed pornography seems to us to be in line with traditionally accepted rules protecting the interest in public decency. Restrictions on the open sale of these publications, and analogous arrangements for films, thus seem to us to be justified . If one goes all the way down this line, however, one arrives at the situation in which people objected to even knowing that pornography was being read in private; and if one accepted as a basis for coercing one persons actions, the fact that others would be upset even by the thought of his performing these actions, one would be denying any substantive liberty at all.

With Each Moment, Comes Great Triumph Essay Example for Free

With Each Moment, Comes Great Triumph Essay It is inherent to say that each of us refers back to memories of our childhood to reminisce in the awkward, comical and daunting experiences and discover parallelisms to our present existence. Rohinton Mistry writes of the parallel fears of water and swimming from childhood to adulthood and of overcoming, slowly but surely, a seemingly trivial act. The imagery and memory of water, specifically, is a key theme throughout the story. Mistry writes of the symbolism and meaning of water for the character in a philosophical way through self-exploring questions and recollections. The thought and discussion of taking swimming lessons as an adult gives an opening to memories of attempted swimming lessons and the importance of Chaupatty Beach. â€Å"It seemed that the dirtier it became, the more crowds it attracted†¦ (Or was it the crowds that made it dirtier? )†(260) This distant and uninviting body of water is the starting place for swimming lessons, though quick to be unenthusiastic â€Å"because of the filth†(261) and the ‘guttersnipes’ that taunted and teased the young learner. This causes the reader to remember some aspects of swimming and the experiences of struggling physically, fearing peer pressure, and the unknown of deep water. Mistry is increasingly descriptive of water imagery and moments of memory so these images move off the page and into imagination, allowing the reader to visualise the filth, the struggle and the fear. â€Å"The universal symbol of life and regeneration did nothing but frustrate me. (260) There are numerous symbolic terms and meanings for water where water is cleansing, type of renewal, or a connection between symbolic life and death. When the first adult swimming lesson is attempted, there is a feeling of hopelessness and terror. The character is weighed with emotion and burdened with dispelled expectation. â€Å"The swimming pool, like Chaupatty beach, has produced a stillbirth. †(263) The character is beyond disappointment when he realises his expectation of triumph emerges into a symbol of death. Failure to swim through filth must mean something other than failure to rebirth – failure of symbolic death? †(264) This question is posed as much for the reader as they are for the character. There is a need to answer for the character so he might come to the realisation that there is more to life than being imprisoned by the failed attempts, to press on, move forward and endeavour to reach your goal. The character eventually becomes in a way reborn through his seemingly ordinary experience in the bathtub and the human nature of anting to overcome a fear. We relate to the idea of feeling reborn when overcoming the anxiety of particular obstacles on our lives. Finally, at his own pace, he realises he must fight his panic and fear of water as he has seen â€Å"the world outside the water†¦ it is now time to see what is inside. †(270) He sees with a changed perspective, his eyes are opened to the opportunities that he is yet to face and eventually triumph.

Edward Snowden: The Most Famous Whistleblower

Edward Snowden: The Most Famous Whistleblower Whistleblowers are some of the most important people to have in a democracy. They provide information that the government doesnt want to get out, while this could be dangerous in the case of Edward Snowden he released information that was valuable to the citizens of the united states. Snowden is not the first person to do something like this and has previously stated he was inspired by Daniel Ellsberg who leaked pentagon papers in the 1970s. Even though hes wanted by the government to some people Snowden is a hero. Edward Snowden who was born in North Carolina but later mover to Massachusetts had dropped out of of high school but was no degenerate. A bad case of mononucleosis kept him out of school for 9 months so instead of falling behind he decided that he would drop out. After dropping out he began studying computers at Anne Arundel Community College which was located in Maryland. His father was quoted saying We always considered Ed the smartest one in the family. and this was clear when Edward scored a 145 on two different IQ tests. He later enlisted into the special forces because he wanted to learn new languages, but never made it out of basic because he either broke both legs or washed out because of shin splints, it depends on who you ask. After this he was a security guard at a college in maryland that had ties to the NSA. After this he landed a job with the C.I.A.(Central Intelligence Agency) but quit after being suspected of attempting to break into classified files. While still with the C.I.A. he was on a mission in Switzerland where he first discovered corruption in the Government. This is where he first wanted to become a whistleblower but with Obama being soon elected he was optimistic about the changes he was going to make. After working for the C.I.A. for some time he moved to a private IT company where he worked as a contractor and would later work in a few offices for the N.S.A. this is where he notices a breach in security and got his hands on the classified information that he would leak. The definition of a hero is someone who is admired or idealized for courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities. When he was younger, saw sergeant Frank Ford reveal the information about the war in Iraq he thought of him as a hero for being honest, and letting the people know what was really going on in Iraq. Even though Ford was once Snowdens hero Snowden would make a bigger impact than Ford. Sowden and Ford are not the only whistleblowers who have made themselves public. Manning had leaked hundreds of documents that had to do with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Before any of them Ellsberg had leaked a ton of information in the early seventies. Nixons administration alienated Ellsberg much like Obamas administration has done to Snowden but now Ellsberg is considered a hero. Now Snowden is considered the hero to some people but a lot of people within the government or who listen to the government would disagree. He has inspired many other anonymous leaks from within the U.S. Government. Snowden receives credit for most of these but he has said that many leaks come from another source or other sources. The U.S. government has made it clear that they know about the the copycats when a representative, Adam Schiff who is a member of the House Intelligence Committee claiming that it is a big concern of theirs. Schiff also said The degree that people have been lionizing Snowden, it encourages people to make a name for themselves by leaking which is true. Even Some Government officials have publicly claimed that they went too far. Though many people think the Government was in the wrong for so intensely tracking suspected terrorist it makes sense for the Government to do that because some 9/11 hijackers were tracked but then nothing was done about them. Officials say that this could have put the country in more danger by showing potential terrorist how the government tracks them it allows them to b ypass those methods. Schiff also claimed that the Government should be more careful with who gets access to what by saying Snowden should have never had access in the first place. The Pentagon has approved as many as 3.2 million people access to highly classified information from 2006 to 2011 (CNN). After fleeing the country Snowden got ahold of journalists and offered them an unprecedented scoop(PBS). Even though the two journalists had received the documents it was not until they were on a plane and out of the country when they felt safe to open them and look at the things Snowden had shared. Greenwald, one of the journalists was quoted saying I didnt sleep one second for the next 16 hours because the adrenaline made that impossible. He said that he understood that this would be a story like hed never written before and one that people would talk about for decades. The journalists were given thousands of documents that showed what the Obama administration had been doing to regular citizens who had no criminal records and were not suspected terrorists. They were simply eavesdropping on regular citizens who had not done anything wrong. Some of the eavesdropping was justified but a surprising amount was not. Snowdens leaks shed a serious amount of light on this problem and it le d to a two part series on Frontline that dove into the topic from after 9/11 all the way to when things were leaked by Snowden. This series went even further than Snowden when they had revealed the extent that the government went to to keep these secrets hidden. It was during this time where Snowden had revealed that the worst of the wiretapping and eavesdropping had come from when Bush was president. Snowden still cares about America though saying that he would like to return one day and I told the government Id volunteer for prison, as long as it served the right purpose, he says I care more about the country than what happens to me. But we cant allow the law to become a political weapon or agree to scare people away from standing up for their rights, no matter how good the deal. Im not going to be part of that. (Wired). These statements show his true character and that he really does care about America. Snowden claimed that he had tried to leave clues for the N.S.A. to show him what documents were actually copied and which ones were just looked at. Despite these efforts the N.S.A. had missed the clues and reported that he took over a million documents when in reality he on took a few thousand. Snowden sounded disappointed when speaking on the fact that the government had missed his clues because he had thought that they were obvious. Sponsors from both major political parties c an agree that this has shown that the U.S. government needs to stop their mass surveillance for clear reasons. This was such a big deal that President Obama himself as well as congress have both publicly talked about the issue and the Supreme Court has hinted at making a decision about the governments use of unwarranted surveillance. This was never Snowdens intention he had just wanted to share what the government was doing because he felt that it was unjust. Despite the efforts by the government to make Snowden out to be the bad guy more than half the population agrees with what he did. Many government officials have spoken on this but not in the favor of snowden, N.S.A. director Keith Alexander claimed that the russian government had manipulated him while the secretary of state called him a coward and a traitor.

Expert Systems In Health Care :: essays research papers

A case referring to the beneficial use of the expert systems in the health sector was the attempt of the LDS Hospital in Salt Lake city,Utah to build “ the most complex artificial intelligence system ever created'; according to the words of DR David Classen.Its name was AIC or “Antibiotic Computer Consultant'; and it was part of HELP(Health Evaluation through Logical Processing), which was LDS’s hospital information system. The latter was existed, before the implementation of the Expert System. The role of AIC was to help doctors determine proper antibiotic treatment for specific patients.Achieving the specific purpose,the Expert System followed the above stages: 1) The doctor turned to the system with information on the infection type and site, and also identified the patient to the computer. 2) The system determined the pathogens, which are likely to have caused the infection. 3) The software examined the patient’s medical records( through the HELP information system) and searched for similar cases nationwide. 4) Finally, it displayed the five most likely antibiotic regimens to be effective and the cost of the prescription for each one. Altough,the system was extremely rewarding and expanded to include other cases involving antibiotics, some criticisms were made against it. It was stated that the system was unwieldy and that physicians had to enter much information, which was useless. Of course, the best answer came straightly from the physicians, who highlighted many important benefits of the AIC. The 88% of them believed that the use of AIC was very simple and they would recommend it to other colleagues. Another 85% stated that the program improved their selection of antibiotics, and 81% agreed that it enhanced patient care. Concerning its usability, doctors access into the system 3 times a day.

The Theory and Implementations of The Balance of Payments (BOP) :: Economics

The Theory and Implementations of The Balance of Payments (BOP) To develop country’s economic strength under the tendency of globalization, governments always seek to achieve two macroeconomic objectives, i.e. stable growth of internal economy and balanced development of external economic activities. The former can be realized by effectively adjusting Economic Growth, Unemployment and Inflation. However, how to realize the latter? An external macroeconomic variable is needed. In practice, the Balance of Payments fulfills this responsibility. (A). Balance of Payments (BOP used in following text), in principle, is a record of the country’s transactions with the rest of the world. It shows the country’s payment s to or deposits in other countries (debits) and its receipts or deposits from other countries (credits)[1]. The BOP account[2] also shows the balance between these debits and credits under various headings, which are categorized into the Current Account, the Capital Account and the Financial Account, which compose the main elements of balance of payments. The Current Account largely measures flow of real resources including exports and imports of goods and services, income receivable and payable abroad, and current transfers from and to abroad. It is normally divided into three subdivisions (Figure 1). Trade in goods account (often as the trade balance) The total value of exports of goods, subtracting the total value of imports of goods. Trade in services account Imports and exports of services, such as banking and insurance, transport services, law, accountancy, management consultancy and tourism. Investment incomes Interest, profit and dividends flowing into and out of the country. Transfers of money Two sectors: government transfers and transfers made by other sectors. Government transfers include contributions to international organisations (e.g. UK to EU budget) and foreign aid. The ‘other sectors’ section many highlights the transfer of assets by individuals to foreign bank accounts. The Capital Account measures external transactions in capital transfers, and in acquisition or disposal of non-produced, non-financial assets, which include land and subsoil assets, patents and copyrights etc. Capital transfers are transfers of ownership of a fixed asset or the forgiveness of a liability. The Financial Account records transactions in financial assets and liabilities between residents and non-residents. It shows how an economy's external transactions are financed. Transactions in the financial account are classified into direct investment, portfolio investment, other investment, and reserve assets[3] (Figure 2). Direct investment Money flows across national boundaries for the purpose of investing and it is thus either a credit or a debit item. Portfolio investment Changes in the holding of paper assets, such as company shares and bonds. Other investment It comprises loans, currency, deposits, and short and long-term trade credits, financial derivatives and other accounts receivable and payable. Reserve assets This refers to the reserves of gold, special drawing rights (SDRs) and

Powerful Theme and Allusions to Sex in Andersons Womanhood :: Anderson Womanhood Essays

Powerful Theme and Allusions to Sex in Anderson's Womanhood    Catherine Anderson's poem "Womanhood" tells about a young girl and her transition to womanhood.   In this intricately woven poem the reader will learn very little about the girl.   Neither she nor her mother are ever named, and no information is given about them or their family life.   What the reader does discover is what lies ahead for her as she begins her first day sewing rugs.   The poem begins a few moments before she enters the gates of the sweatshop that symbolizes her entry into womanhood.   Anderson uses metaphor within this poem to dramatize the difference in what lies ahead for her.   She should be looking forward to a bright and cheerful future, instead, she is faced with the drudgery of a life working in a sweatshop sewing rugs.   Anderson has woven this poem together so there is a link created between the first and second stanzas of the poem.   Each line in the first stanza, describing the carefree attitude of the young girl correlates with a line in th e second stanza illustrating how her life will be far different after she enters the gates of the factory and womanhood.     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Within this poem there are many references or allusions to sex.   Most women are considered to have entered womanhood when they have their first sexual experience with a man.   Anderson plays up this aspect of becoming a woman in the poem to symbolize the girl's losing her innocence and youth to work in the sweatshop.   In essence, she is losing her virginity to that same sweatshop.   The first of these allusions to sex is in the opening lines of the poem; "she slides over/the hot upholstery" (1,2).   The young girl is described as sliding over hot upholstery, like girls sometimes do to snuggle up next to their boyfriends when driving a car.   This verse can also be seen as a metaphor for the hot young skin of a beautiful young girl.   Another example of these references is when Anderson describes the girl   as "loves humming & swaying to the music" (5).   This can be seen as the act of sexual intercourse itself.   The rhythmic swaying of bodies can be seen as little else especially when paired with line 25, "rocking back and forth"(25).   This is further emphasized by Anderson by her use of the ampersand signs (&) which she only uses in these two lines.