Perspectives on Operation Management Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Perspectives on Operation Management - Essay Example This paper intends to advise the independent retail outlets situated in Hartwell in Essex on some potential operations strategies in response to the recent opening of Asda/Walmart on the edge of town. Operations strategies While planning operations strategy redesign in response to the recent opening of Asda, the retail outlets must consider the position of the Asda in the UK market and its strengths. Statistical data indicate that Asda is the second largest chain in the UK in terms of market share (BBC News, 2011). The company’s UK grocery market share was 16.5% in 2010. Furthermore, it must be noted that Asda is the subsidiary of retail market giant Walmart, the largest retailer in the world. Low price offer is one of the major core competencies of the Walmart that assisted the corporation to grow up to the top of the world’s retail market. In addition, the company has good reputation across the UK market. Low inventory levels and short flow times are the major operati ons strategies of Walmart. This assists the corporation to maintain adequate levels of inventory all times and thereby keep more working capital with the firm. Hence, the operations strategies developed by the retail outlets must be comprehensive enough to confront with the Asda’s powerful marketing policies. ... Thirdly, each retail outlet has to clearly identify order winners and order qualifiers. More precisely, they have to recognise which elements are necessary to win an order and what makes an item attractive to customers. Finally, each retailer must evaluate its position in the Hartwell retail market. It is advisable for the retail outlets in Hartwell to adapt to the internet based operations strategies because Walmart is still at its early stages of researching internet opportunities. Internet can be effectively employed to strengthen the existing core competencies and by integrating recently developed and traditional supply chain activities. Market analysis reports show that retail firms nowadays raise major portion of their revenues from online sales. The Web based operations strategies aid retailers to significantly reduce operational costs and increase their efficiency in order processing, product delivery, and customer service. However, the retailers must be more innovative while deploying web based operations strategies since customers may be pulled towards the companies that present product displays more attractively to site visitors. It is also recommendable for the retail outlets to develop customised operations strategies as such a policy would better fit the needs and requirement of these retailers. Customised operations strategies may assist retailers to effectively meet the changing tastes and specifications of customers on time (Lowson, 2003). ‘Make to order and assemble to order’ would be the most recommendable production related operations strategies for the retail outlets. In the words of Dickersbach (2005, p. 27), under the make to order strategy, retailers can add customer specifications to a particular product after

Do I know that I have a Hand Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Do I know that I have a Hand - Essay Example For the case of the dream doubt, we are prone to doubt our dreams, why? Because dreams are an assumption of what the reality would be to us rather than a certainty of what it really is. For instance, one uses his/her hands to grab something in real life and dream; therefore, it is hard to tell when we are imagining and we are not.REM is the stage where dreams occur and in eight hours of sleep there is about three cycle of REM stage. The first is close to 15 minutes then the rest are 40 to 60 minutes long. Because we are not dreaming for few minutes like we remember when we wake up from a dream, we cannot really prove if we woke up from a real life and continuing to dream or woke up from a dream and continuing the real life. If hands were unmovable items, it would be harder to believe they are not real. That is why when we wake up we find that in was just a brief assumption and not a reality. We need to discover that we cannot know something at the same period and doubt it. One comes first. We need to doubt to believe. That is why when we dream we are using our hand we are believing in a different perspective as opposed to waking up from our dream to find out that reality is far much bigger that the dream, thus we seek to doubt the dream. Thus the dream and reality all refer to the uncertain and certain analytical point of view. â€Å"They are on the one hand experiences of the ordinary, healthy mind, experiences with which no one could plausibly deny an acquaintance, and yet, on the other hand, they are comparable, in their extravagance and deceptiveness, to the delusions of insanity the narrator has just been considering.† †¦ I see plainly that there are never any sure signs by means of which being awake can be distinguished from being asleep. The result is that I begin to feel dazed, and this very feeling only reinforces the notion that I may be asleep. If someone without hands can dream that they have

HTC Human Resource Analysis Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

HTC Human Resource Analysis - Research Paper Example The traditional HRM functions and technical HRM functions, as accumulated in the ideology of SHRM, covers a wide range of activities which includes recruitment, selection, performance evaluation, training and development as well as management of remuneration and employee advantages. By balancing HRM activities with organisational business strategies, SHRM can effectually reproduce flexible planning and use human resources in order to accomplish the organisational objectives, and accordingly assist organisations to gain a sustainable competitive edge (Wei, 2006). With due concern to these aspects, the paper will discuss the strategic framework of HTC Corporation using the theory of SHRM and also seek to identify the HR issues faced by the organisation. Hereby, the objective of the paper is to analyse the HRM practices in HTC and accordingly make recommendations towards its improvements. Strategic Framework of HTC HTC Corporation principally deals in manufacturing electronic products s uch as laptops, mobile phones, smartphones and other handheld devices. The business functions executed by HTC are spread internationally. It is worth mentioning that the company has been learnt to experience a significant growth rate in its international as well as national operations owing to its effective approach towards HRM and comprehensive differentiation strategies (Scribd Inc., 2012). Strategies in any organisation are concerned towards the long term planning which are further divided into five aspects, i.e. organisational mission and objectives, environmental examinations, strategic formulations, strategic implementations and strategic assessments. The mission outlines the organisational values and ambitions. The mission and objectives designates the way of strategic management within an organisation (Erdil & Gunsel, n.d.). In this context, in HTC, the objective and mission of the organisation has been identified to emerge as one of the top smartphone organisations in the w orld. Therefore, it is quite likely that the human resource strategies adopted by HTC replicate its organisational objectives and mission. The examination of environment assists in identifying the organisational strengths as well as weaknesses along with prevailing external organisational prospects and threats. These aspects are significant for the future sustainability of any business. Contextually, the industry where HTC operates its business is dynamic in nature which incorporates the characteristics of mobile phone sector with personal computer sector making a complete utilisation of the benefits of high-end technology. Moreover, the value chain of HTC contains operating system, brand, and telecommunication providers along with the dynamic resources and capabilities (Chiou, 2010). The strategic formulations in any organisation includes the senior executives liable for assessing the interface between strategic issues and making strategic selections which intends to direct employe es to satisfy the organisational goals. It is in this regard that the strategies of HTC are always

McCarthys power Essay Example for Free

McCarthys power Essay We also see this clearly when the corrupt Putnam ruthlessly and heartlessly kills off his neighbours to buy their land, using his daughter and Tituba as mediums to accuse people with and feeding names into their mouths, as he does with the words, Sarah Good? Did you ever see Sarah Good with him (the devil)? Or Osburn? Before his daughter Ruth has even admitted to witchcraft, he spreads the word of witchcraft, cruelly calculating his next move. The words, That is a notorious sign of witchcraft, a prodigious sign, indicate his joy at the opportunity to make some money and settle some old grudges. His disregard for his daughters health is yet another example of his lack of humanity. Parris is equally selfish and cold. When questioning Abigail about her dancing in the woods, Parris proceeds to say, I must know it now, for my enemies will, and they will ruin me with it you must understand I have many enemies there is a faction sworn to drive me from my pulpit, like Putnam lacking any concern for Abigail. It is clear that people like Danforth, Parris and Putnam arent in the business of helping Salems society, as people of their status should be, but in furthering their own possessions. Without these individuals keeping order and maintaining justice in the town, all of the old grudges and petty grievances are allowed to run riot and influence the proceedings in court, as we see when Ann Putnam accuses Rebecca Nurse, arguably the most respected person in the town, of killing her babies. This is also an example of how little scientific knowledge was available at the time, and how eager people were to place blame on other people. Aside from the few individuals with integrity, like Proctor, Corrie and Rebecca Nurse, the rest of Salems society will sacrifice others to safeguard their name in the town. When questioned by Hale, Abigail seems to instinctively play the innocent child which the audience knows she is definitely not, an example of dramatic irony. Im a good girl! Im a proper girl! These words highlight how quick she is to defend herself, and her insecurity about her image and reputation in the village. Once she is safe, she proceeds to shift blame onto others, like Tituba. She tried (to make me drink the soup) but I refused She made me drink blood! Abigail realises her word is taken over Titubas because of the racial prejudice at the time the play is set in. People like Abigail, Parris and Putnam arent afraid to use this discrimination to their advantage, which only serves to kill more people, or to ruin their lives. It is ironic that one of the few admirable qualities that are found in the town is the reason that so many people die. Ultimately, people like Hale and Proctor realise that it isnt being seen as a good Christian or letting people think you are innocent that matters, but knowing yourself that you are innocent and have nothing to fear. It is this that convinces them that everything should be done to protect your innocence, even giving your life, in Proctors case. People like Proctor and Reverend Hale are purified by Danforths crucible but for the wrong reasons. While Danforths words, We burn a hot fire here; it melts down all concealment, would appear to be correct, they are ironic, in that the only way the truth comes out is if innocent people die first These men, along with the many others who are convicted, struggle long and hard with the decision of confession and lies versus integrity and righteousness. For others like Rebecca Nurse the choice is already decided, as her words, Let you fear nothing, another judgement awaits us all, suggest. She is firm in her belief that they will be repaid by God for maintaining their innocence. Johns dilemma is much worse, as he has family and children to worry about, and his name is ruined in the village already, as news of his adultery charges would have circulated. The impact of outpourings like, I lie and sign myself to lies! I am not worth the dust of the feet of them that hang, gives you the feeling that he realises the complexity of his situation, and that he is trapped either way. The real problem to him is that he believes it is his fault. Elizabeths last line, He has his goodness now. God forbid I take it from him, lets you know that she understands his choice and she respects and forgives him once again, which is ultimately what he wanted. The society has the ability to let innocent people die, not only because they are loyal to themselves and no one else, but because these people are willing to die for what they believe, or what they want, in Proctors case. There are many other people in the village who try to speak their mind, and do what is morally right, but whose aspirations are crushed by the opposing factors, like Parris, Danforth and Abigail. Mary Warren is a good example of this, as she hides from her fears, but then confronts them, only to be brought to her knees by the sheer callousness of Abigail. We can also attribute this to the earlier mention of Danforths interrogation-style cross examining as well, as he repeatedly asks the same question to Mary, Has Mr. Proctor ever threatened you for this deposition? Has he ever threatened you? Has he threatened you? It personifies the disorder of the courts legal system, as if Danforth doesnt get the answer he wants, you will suffer, whether you are right or wrong. Mary eventually caves in to the pressure, condemning Proctor in the process, although sympathy is felt for her, as all of her weaknesses are ruthlessly exploited by the girls, betraying Mary and leaving her with no other alternative. When Mary goes to court, she feels as if she is on trial and it is her credibility that is questioned, even though it is she who is accusing the girls, again linking to Hales earlier comment, Is every defence an attack upon this court? Danforth refuses to question the girls, as if they are found to be guilty, his reputation will be ruined and his judgement will be compromised. Instead he turns a blind eye you any damning evidence against the girls, and with the help of Parris, forces people to lie to save themselves, vindicating his decisions in the process. This is revealed when Parris declares, There is either obedience or the church will burn like Hell is burning! This is ironic, as Parris church is already burning like Hell as a result of his wayward leadership. Outbursts like this not only show the real character behind Parris fai ade, but they also serve to highlight the way he and Danforth work against the community, with an attitude that only helps the corrupt. Once Danforth has weakened the accuser, he provides them with a way out, as he does with Mary, slowly pushing her to convict Proctor with suggestions like, It may well be Mary Warren has been conquered by Satan, practically putting words in her mouth. His desperation becomes much more apparent when he threatens Mary, You will confess or you will hang, another example of his twisted logic and self-serving nature. This pressure to do what is expected draws parallels to the McCarthy era, when Un-American activities were seen as wrong, and the one person who should represent hope, Danforth in the case of The Crucible, is in fact an antagonist in the whole predicament. This pressure again links to fear, but in this case it is fear of authority that reigns supreme, as there are few people who have the courage to challenge the decisions made by Danforth, and face the harsh consequences. Any Salemites who enter the court are forced to choose between Danforths and Parris version of right, and the Christian right, which, in a just system, should be the same thing. As the play goes on, the audiences antipathy for Parris grows, as they see him twisting the words of others and lying in court to protect himself, hardly the actions people expect of a priest. A prime example of dramatic irony is witnessed as the audience can see straight through Parris false exterior, as he desperately tries to cover up anything that could point to his knowledge of the girls just dancin in the woods. Few Salemites have any knowledge of his ulterior motives, or that anything he does or says is purely for his own well being, and the manner in which he projects himself is a far cry from his real character. Parris attempts to use theology to secure his position in the good books of Danforth and the community, often referring to the Bible during the proceedings in court. He leads most of the society to believe that he is trying to help them and, by lulling them into a false sense of security, he then seizes the opportunity to rid the town of anyone he believes is a threat to himself, or his position. Utilising his status and reputation, he preaches, You should surely know that Cain were an upright man, and yet he did kill Abel, in an attempt to have Proctor convicted. No court can provide unbiased or uncorrupted justice if its own minister is trying to have the defendant killed. His words, The devil lives on such confidences! Without confidences there would be no conspiracy, are ironic but true, as it is he who as kept much greater secrets, and it is he is the devil of Salem. In this sentence he is accusing someone who contrasts greatly with him, Giles Corey. Miller uses Corey to bring humour to the play, but he also stands alongside Proctor and Rebecca Nurse as one of the main symbols of integrity and righteousness. Although he is revealed as a nai ve, slightly puzzled man, he isnt afraid to speak his mind, albeit with some harsh consequences like his wifes death. Unlike Parris, he values his friends, which eventually leads to his death. His response to the choice of betraying his friend or dying is admirable, his integrity clear as he replies, I stand mute. The audience feels a great deal of sympathy and admiration not only for Corey, but also Proctor and Rebecca Nurse who set a great example that, few others follow. There is immense injustice, as the only people who die are innocent, and they are the privileged few who have integrity. Although he cant stop the proceedings in the court, Hale disassociates himself from the fraudulent proceedings in the Salem court, with the statement, I denounce these proceedings, I quit this court, ruining his reputation in the process. His efforts to correct Danforths judgement are brought to a halt, often by Danforth himself who quips, I will have nothing from you Mr. Hale! This again highlights the stubbornness of Danforth, as he refuses to listen to anyone The structure of the play is quite regimented, as there always appears to be a glimmer of hope in each act, but the end of every act ends with chaos. This shows that the situation could never be resolved, as the paranoia and hysteria undermined any efforts to do this. In reality, it was the Salem society that was the devil, as Proctor declares, A fire, a fire is burning! I hear the boot of Lucifer, I see his filthy face! And it is my face, and yours Danforth! This again shows the humbleness of Proctor, as he has the integrity to face up to his shortcomings, while Danforth would prefer to hide, frantically trying to drown out Proctors words with his own, with the frenetic cry, Take him (Proctor) and Corey with him to the jail! This is another illustration of Danforths cowardice, and his inability to confront his flaws. Proctors earlier quote, God is dead! also serves to show the disorder in the justice system. The people who should represent God, like Parris and Danforth, are now the devils. We see further irony when Danforth states, I will not deal in lies, in a bid to obtain Proctors confession, when in fact, every pardon or conviction was based on a lie. No one can be sure if Danforth believed he was right in doing what he did, but it is obvious that he wasnt right. In contrast, it is more obvious that Parris had a hidden agenda. However, both were responsible for the deaths of innocent people, although it seems that this was the only thing that could bring their reign to an end. One of the reasons Miller wrote this play was to denounce McCarthyism, and the end again draws parallels to this period, as the whole saga only came to an end when someone took a stand against the state. There were very few people who were willing to stand up for their beliefs, not only in Salem, but also during the McCarthy era, which is understandable given the consequences. . Miller projects other figures as unlikely heroes, everyday people like Rebecca Nurse, Giles Corey and John Proctor, who have the courage and integrity to admit to their faults, and die for their beliefs. In this era, with the town steeped in anger, vengeance and despair, these individuals stand alone making their achievements even greater. Once a stand had been taken however, the repercussions suffered by the corrupt leaders of these eras were also similar. Danforths power over the public diminished rapidly and Parris walked the highroad, and was never seen again. McCarthys power ceased as well, highlighting again, that a few individuals with a conscience can make a difference, one way or the other.

Rizals life Essay Example for Free

Rizals life Essay Home, church, and school are the three important pillars that shaped Rizal’s identity as the voice and prophet of the Filipino people and his advocacy that unity equates to prosperity. b. Summary Rizal’s identity was shaped in his home, at school and at the church. These institutions gave long-lasting impression and influence to him. Rizal’s mother helped him to read, write, and express his emotions through poetry. The school at Binan gave Rizal his first formal schooling, shaped his character, and formed his habits. The church, on the other hand, shaped Rizal’s philosophy of life, moral philosophy, question of choice and manner of ethics. All these three institutions are the core to Rizal’s advocacy that unity is the strongest link that binds people together in building a great nation. Rizal is the dominant voice in our history not only because of the things said above but also because he was the first to put his own advice into practice. Because of his preference to choosing the ethical side of life over his personal freedom, he had to face the firing squad at the Luneta. c. Reactions or Comments The article, for me, brings out the nationalist inside of me. It makes me want to do more for my country and for my countrymen. It also made me realize that Rizal’s life was also a tough life for him to go through. My eyes were gradually opened to the fact that Rizal was just like any Filipino child, but I guess his only difference from other Filipino children is that he lived every lessons and insights that he had learned from his parents, from his school, and from their church. He chose the ethical side of life over his freedom. He had given so many advices to his fellow Filipinos because, I think, he believed that his countrymen will be able to live those things. He always gave emphasis on unity in most of his works because he firmly believes that unity is the most important factor in saving people from foreign disturbances and in facing any national problem. A statement of Rizal was cited on the article by the author. The statement goes, â€Å"Law knows no color of skin, nor does reason differentiate between nostrils. † I think what Rizal is trying to say here is that we shouldn’t be ashamed of who we are or what we have or how we look because everything is equal in the eyes of justice. We should fight for our freedom because it is in freedom that the people are led to security and prosperity. Indeed, the content of the article really had an impact on me. The article was nicely done and was easy to understand. Because of this article, I finally realized that Rizal’s works and thoughts are not only for his time but also for ours.

Rousseaus Successful Responds Towards Machiavellis Arguments Philosophy Essay

Rousseaus Successful Responds Towards Machiavellis Arguments Philosophy Essay The Qualities of the Prince, the most notable treatise written by Niccolo Machiavelli in 1513, instructs the Medicis, the rulers of Italy, to save Italy from the rapacious invasion of France and Spain. In The Qualities of the Prince, Machiavelli proposes qualities that princes should acquire in order to sustain authority such as to have a balance between being feared and loved, assuming that a prince righteously possesses the power to control the people. Along with these qualities, Machiavelli also exerts his views on the properties of human nature, power, war, and the responsibilities of the leaders towards their followers. On the other hand, The Origin of Civil Society, an essay written by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a significant modern philosopher, in 1762, focuses on the issue of the nature and right of man both in a natural and civilized society and thus conveys the ideas of Rousseau about what a legitimate government with a stable basis should be based on. In contrast to the belief of Machiavelli that a prince, his decisions unalterable, functions as the only commander, Rousseau claims that a government, concerning the general will (68) of the people and is elected by the people, should rule as the leader. Rousseau also asserts views opposing Machiavellis stances on war, power, human rights, and duties of the government towards its followers. Machiavelli and Rousseau formulate their ideas at different time in history with different purposes and under various social and cultural influences. Thus even though they both discuss the relationship between leaders and followers and share a few similar ideas on government, Rousseau disagrees most Machiavellis views based on war, human nature and rights, power, society, and responsibilities of the leaders. However, while Machiavelli mostly quotes historical contents to support his arguments, Rousseau uses convincing rhetorical approaches like aphorism and analogy and analyzes as well as examines closely the concepts of both the other thinkers as well as his own before coming to a reasonable conclusion. By using these methods, readers are provoked to think critically, and consequently, they accepts the ideas of Rousseau more readily than those of Machiavelli, indicating that Rousseau expresses more successful arguments than Machiavelli. To begin with, Rousseau agrees with Machiavelli that a strong government is needed in a society, but he has reservations about Machiavelli advising the prince to go to war. Machiavelli implies that a society requires a strong government through urging a prince not to take anything as his profession but war, its institutions, and its discipline (39), as Machiavelli believes that by focusing on the art of war, a strong government may be created. Rousseau approves this idea, believing that a strong government is necessary for the well-being of the people in a society. He believes that a society needs a strong government because a strong regime, guiding people to act in concert, directly leads to a powerful and cohesive association that can effectively assist people within the society in [withstanding] any resistance exerted upon them from without (67); thus, when one weaker member of the association is attacked, due to both duty and interest, the stronger individuals within the associat ion can be united to provide mutual assistance (69) against the attackers. Such actions defending members of a society against the outside powers under the guide of a strong government provides great advantage to the members of the association. Yet Rousseau does not assent that a leader should take war as his only profession (Machiavelli 39). Rousseau claims that going to war is never righteous especially when most of the times the despot is actually trying to satisfy his insatiable greed, and the vexatious demands of his Ministers instead of keeping his promise of providing civil peace to his subjects (63). As an alternative, Rousseau holds that rulers should take the common will of his people as his top priority and work to make decisions that benefit everyone in the community. While Machiavelli uses specific historical figures like Francesco Sforza and Philopoemon to support his idea that war is the most important part of a princes career, Rousseau convincingly suggests the benefit member of a society can get when a government considers the common will as its chief considerations. Rousseau maintains that if the government makes decisions according to common will, the weaker members of the society will greatly benefit fro m this action as they will receive mutual assistance (62) when being attacked from the mightier individuals with the support and guidance of the government, assuming that the common will is to defend themselves against the foreign forces for their own well-beings. This argument is more convincing than that of Machiavellis as the readers being part of the society is more closely related to the situation proposed by Rousseau but not to the historical contents Machiavelli mentions, and thus readers sympathize with Rousseaus argument more. In addition, while Machiavelli asserts that the Prince, acting as the only commander, has absolute authority over his people, and his decisions [must therefore] be irrevocable (50), Rousseau argues that being a member of a civil government that concerns the common will, every person of this association has the right to alter the decisions made by the governors or even to overthrow the existing government and establish a new one. Due to the cultural influences, Machiavelli presumes from the very beginning that every person in the country would summit themselves fully to the prince and obey his orders without questioning, thus, this leads Machiavelli to assume that people do not have the right to either choose who to rule them or decide how they are to be governed. However, Rousseau, using aphorism and analogy, makes a powerful and convincing contention against Machiavellis assumptions of common people having no say in what the ruler would do. Rousseau states at the very beginning that man is born free (59), a widely accepted aphorism increasing the persuasiveness of the argument, and later suggests that as soon as a man attains the age of reason he becomes his own master (60) given that every man deserves a condition of equal independence (59). After constituting a strong basis for his argument, Rousseau then goes on to compare the political associations to a typical family (60) with, by analogy, the ruler as the father and the people as the children. Rousseau claims that since the children are, by the law of nature, free to make decisions that will best assure [their] continued existence (60), they are vindicated to choose whether or not to keep stay at home and be controlled by their father as soon as they are independent. Consequently, Rous seau comes to a conclusion that people in a society should similarly have the right to choose whether to summit themselves to the government or to establish a new one themselves. By using the analogy of comparing the structure of a family to the political associations (60), an analogy that relates the personal lives of the readers to the government, Rousseau effectively guides the readers to thoroughly understand and agree with his points of view. This argument of Rousseau saying that the people has the right to choose who to govern is made even more convincing when Thomas Jefferson, a former Virginia governor, backs Rousseaus idea by claiming in The Declaration of Independence that it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish [any Form of Government], and to institute new Government (80). Additionally, regarding the matter of power, Rousseau rebuts Machiavellis idea that people will submit themselves fully to those who are physically mightiest. Machiavelli strongly believes that only by being armed, equivalent to be might, people would willingly summit themselves to the rulers (40). On the contrary, Rousseau maintains that yielding to physical power is a necessity but not of will (63) and therefore asserts that the act of forcing people to obey through the use of violence is not very practical as people will not surrender themselves to the mightiest person if they had the ability to get away with the orders. Rousseau successfully incites the readers to agree that might does not sustain right by presenting a hypothetical scenario and then asking the readers a provoking rhetorical question. Rousseau supposes that he is being waylaid by a footpad at the corner of a wood and is forced to give him his purse; he then asks the readers: But if I can manage to keep [my purse] from him, is it my duty to hand it over? (62) As a result, readers are actively engaged to the reading and would agree that since Rousseau is being forced in the scenario to hand over his purse, he will very likely to keep his purse away from the footpad (62) if he has the ability. Thus, the readers can conclude that Rousseau is logical when suggesting that Might does not make Right since people are most likely to find ways to escape from obeying orders when they are forced to do so with violence. In addition, by putting forward and examining closely the arguments others might present before proposing his own ideas on the issue, a convincing rhetoric approach, Rousseau has made a successful case in arguing that Might does not create Right (62). Rousseau is aware that people may claim that all power comes from God and no case will ever be found of the violation (62), suggesting that the belief of all power comes from God is generally accepted by the society at that time and no one should be allowed to go against those powers such as the mightiness of people. He therefore associates power with ailments which is also thought to have given by God, proposing that the power given by God can sometimes be faulty and disruptive, and thus encourages readers to think by asking the rhetorical questions: Are we to conclude from such an argument that we are never to call in the doctor?(62) Therefore, what Rousseau is trying to say here is that if people are able to fight against the ailment s given by God through calling in a doctor, they will also be able to rebel against the orders from the mightiest individuals, their physical power given by God, if they are forced to obey with violence. By using this clever rhetorical device, Rousseau has effectively brought out his own idea that Might does not create Right as well as drawing the readers to sympathize with him. To conclude, Machiavelli and Rousseau possess a few similar but mostly dissimilar views on the issue of government. Yet, even though they both have very distinct views on this issue, their ideas are greatly influential and are still affecting the thoughts of many modern politicians as well as inspiring many philosophers and leaders like Tomas Jefferson throughout history. By looking closely at the successful, logical and convincing arguments Rousseau made against those of Machiavellis, a clear understanding of why the society and government today behaves as Rousseau suggests can be easily obtained.

Henrik Ibsens A Dolls House Essay -- Henrik Ibsen Dolls House Essay

Henrik Ibsen's A Doll's House Plot and Sub-plots The play begins on Christmas Eve of the late 19th century, in the living room of a middle class family, the Helmers. Nora is the female lead role in this play who is treated very child-like by her husband, Torvald. He appears to have taken over her father’s role which in turn allows their marriage to be built on unstable foundations and although both parties have each other’s best interests in mind, it is clear to the audience from the start that the relationship has elements of deception that could possibly be destructive. As the play opens Nora enters with a contented disposition, setting down parcels after a constructive days shopping. A porter brings in a Christmas tree so the audience immediately registers that the play takes part in the festive season which becomes more significant as the play continues as the tree will be symbolic of the relation between Helmer and his wife. Ibsen allows the audience to see already that Nora can be quite frivolous with money due to her many parcels and her generous tipping of the porter. The stage directions describe her as tiptoeing across to her husband’s door which shows her childish temperament as she does not want to be heard, and her eating the macaroons becomes more significant as the scene progresses when Torvald interrogates her about doing so and she outright denies it giving the audience an insight on her deception which obviously develops as the play continues. When Torvald enters the room she quickly hides the macaroons and the audience learn of his promotion as bank manager so they speak of how they can be slightly more extravagant, this gives Helmer the opportunity to condescend her using phr... ...gstad containing the I.O.U. of Nora. Torvald sees this as them both being saved from the humiliation he would have suffered had it have leaked out but Nora can see past this and knows that enough is enough. Regardless of being forgiven by Torvald he still treats her like child, â€Å"Just lean on me, I shall counsel you. I shall guide you.† It is here that Nora can see fully how she is treated and expresses her discontent for being fathered by her own father then being passed on and treated identically by her own husband. She realises that it is necessary for her to go out into the world without his ‘molly-coddling’, mature and become a woman in the true sense of the word. She leaves him as sadly the ‘miracle of miracles’ did not happen for her, he did not change the way he needed to and with that the last occurrence of the play is the door slamming behind her.