Oedipus Essay -- Literary Analysis, Sophocles

Anger is expressed through a variety of reasons. Vague with many divisions and levels, it comprises of different types. Anger is a powerful emotion that reveals the state of a person. Often, this emotion is uncontrollable because it is used to recompense for what has been lost and creates positive and negative effects. Particularly, it is evident when expectations and goals are unfulfilled or do not meet reality. In Sophocles’s Oedipus the King and Shusaku Endo’s Silence, the protagonists experience anger for reasons that differ. Sebastian Rodrigues's non-acceptance towards others for their lack of moral values and dignity together with Oedipus's hubris and indignation bring a similar result of emotional change. Led by pride, s shows asperity towards those that he feels have the audacity to unfairly mistreat him. When Tiresias refuses to inform him of the murderer, Oedipus answers â€Å"What, nothing? You miserable old man! You’d drive a stone to fury. Do you still refuse? Your flinty heart set in hopeless stubbornness† (Sophocles 19). Through his questions, his anger is aroused. â€Å"Old man† (Sophocles 19) is a connotation to degrade Tiresias while the â€Å"stone† (Sophocles 19) is personified to erupt from anger due to his loathsomeness. Likewise, his heart is personified to be recreant for scheming together with a supposed assassin. After Tiresias divulges that Oedipus is guilty, Oedipus alleges, â€Å"So this is what he wants, Creon the loyal, Creon so long my friend! Stealing up to overthrow and snatch!† (Sophocles 22). Accusing Creon through his sarcastic tone, positive adjectives such as â€Å"loyal† (Sophocles 22) and â€Å"friend† (Sophocles 22) otherwise heightens a sense of betrayal. As he is unjustly surmised, chided and accused as self-cen... ...d the possibilities are hindered by pride, and the most unexpected and impossible can occur. Frequently, people are oblivious to their own flaws by unknowingly holding the same malfeasance and chiding others. By judging others, they become the very aspect and evil that they hate. Oedipus’s anger, while incognizant about the entire plight, seems more justifiable than that of Rodrigues who continues criticizing people after having seen the entire perspective of the situation. He focuses on the narrower view rather than evaluating it as a whole. Both characters exhibit different sides of anger and pose the question, ‘what extent anger is justifiable?’ Perhaps the message that the authors’ intended to convey was that human beings are biased based on their limited point of view, and therefore fallible. This is an ongoing and innate flaw that we must learn from. Oedipus Essay -- Literary Analysis, Sophocles Anger is expressed through a variety of reasons. Vague with many divisions and levels, it comprises of different types. Anger is a powerful emotion that reveals the state of a person. Often, this emotion is uncontrollable because it is used to recompense for what has been lost and creates positive and negative effects. Particularly, it is evident when expectations and goals are unfulfilled or do not meet reality. In Sophocles’s Oedipus the King and Shusaku Endo’s Silence, the protagonists experience anger for reasons that differ. Sebastian Rodrigues's non-acceptance towards others for their lack of moral values and dignity together with Oedipus's hubris and indignation bring a similar result of emotional change. Led by pride, s shows asperity towards those that he feels have the audacity to unfairly mistreat him. When Tiresias refuses to inform him of the murderer, Oedipus answers â€Å"What, nothing? You miserable old man! You’d drive a stone to fury. Do you still refuse? Your flinty heart set in hopeless stubbornness† (Sophocles 19). Through his questions, his anger is aroused. â€Å"Old man† (Sophocles 19) is a connotation to degrade Tiresias while the â€Å"stone† (Sophocles 19) is personified to erupt from anger due to his loathsomeness. Likewise, his heart is personified to be recreant for scheming together with a supposed assassin. After Tiresias divulges that Oedipus is guilty, Oedipus alleges, â€Å"So this is what he wants, Creon the loyal, Creon so long my friend! Stealing up to overthrow and snatch!† (Sophocles 22). Accusing Creon through his sarcastic tone, positive adjectives such as â€Å"loyal† (Sophocles 22) and â€Å"friend† (Sophocles 22) otherwise heightens a sense of betrayal. As he is unjustly surmised, chided and accused as self-cen... ...d the possibilities are hindered by pride, and the most unexpected and impossible can occur. Frequently, people are oblivious to their own flaws by unknowingly holding the same malfeasance and chiding others. By judging others, they become the very aspect and evil that they hate. Oedipus’s anger, while incognizant about the entire plight, seems more justifiable than that of Rodrigues who continues criticizing people after having seen the entire perspective of the situation. He focuses on the narrower view rather than evaluating it as a whole. Both characters exhibit different sides of anger and pose the question, ‘what extent anger is justifiable?’ Perhaps the message that the authors’ intended to convey was that human beings are biased based on their limited point of view, and therefore fallible. This is an ongoing and innate flaw that we must learn from.

Inside pages :: Computer Science

Inside pages IMPLEMENTATION ============== Version 1 Front and Back page First I inserted a line; this indicates to me that it is splitting the front page and back page. This was then followed up by a textbox on the back page for the surgery times, emergencies and contact number. The last thing I did on the back page was inserting the logo, address, telephone number and surgery name these were imported from the Shared area. The front page included a text box for the title and a hamster picture. The hamster picture was imported from the Shared area. Inside pages The inside pages only consisted of two text boxes and a hamster picture. One would take up nearly all of one inside page and the other just a bit over half an inside page. Then I went to the Shared area for a hamster picture. This picture was similar to the front page hamster picture but was not the same. Version 2 Front and back pages First I opened the program Microsoft Publisher to carry on my implementation of Task 1. I had got the information of the surgery times, emergencies and contact number from the Shared area. I typed this in the text box I inserted earlier. Then I went onto the front page to produce the title. This was done in Microsoft Word and was imported into Microsoft Publisher. Inside Pages First of all I open the program, because it is separate. I carry on the work by adding the text. The text could not fit in the frame. So I had to rearrange the font size to make it smaller. Now that the text was added I can carry on to put colour in the leaflet. Version 3 Front and back pages Now I needed to add any design features I need. So the main design features, which was needed was the colour in the leaflet. S o I added the colour in both these pages so that it was the same colour on the front and back page. It covered everything including the text then I clicked the â€Å"send to back† icon and it went to the background. Inside pages The inside pages were different colour to the front and back pages because I decided to use a variety of colours throughout the leaflet. So I chose what colour I wanted and sent it to the background. Version 4 Front and back pages The leaflet looks to be more appropriate now. This leaflet’s front and back page has changed due to more colours to the textboxes. The textboxes and title textbox now contain different colours and different colours to the front and back page.

Physical Privacy Rights in the Workplace

Physical Privacy rights in the workplace As soon as you raise your right hand in the Military you lose many rights. Just to name a few; the right to wear your hair long; grow a beard and or a full mustache; the right to attend a political rally; the right to express your first amendment rights, and many others. There are some I agree with and some I don’t; never the less I support the military’s general reasoning. I support the right to privacy, and the military in most cases try to comply with the privacy of individuals. One is drug testing. We are human and I understand that some folks have weaker will than others.I have witnessed good men and women in the military lose their careers over the use of drugs. I agree with drug testing and everyone in the military should be drug free. There are many factors in my reasoning. There is espionage. Some may do anything for drugs; even give up their Government’s secrets. Safety is another factor; weather they work with w eapons or machines the risk level is much higher with someone who is impaired. On another note I believe in the privacy of an individual that tests positive for drugs. The word always seems to get out to others.I agree that we can say to other Soldiers that an individual tested positive and will be dealt with legally, as a deterrent for others. But to have everyone know who the individual was and what drug they tested positive for is just wrong. In the past they use to ask what medications are you currently taking? That is a private matter of the individual. If the Soldier tests positive for a controlled substance that happens to be prescribed medication, all the Soldier needs to do is provide proof. Now they do not ask that question anymore. So they have yielded to the right of privacy in that perspective.They still need to work on the privacy for the ones that come up positive. There are many ongoing issues that spark controversy from time to time. Another is tattoos and body pier cing. Now day’s tattoos and body piercing are more common then when I was growing up, especially with today’s youth. For them it’s like a sign of maturity. Even so that the Army and other Armed Forces have relaxed their entrance requirements and allow tattoos on forearms, necks, and legs. However, the Army will still not accept any gang related, or racist tattoos. If a Soldier is caught with any of these tattoos they will be discharged from the military.Body piercing also is prohibited. I see more new Soldiers with tattoos then I ever seen in my career. What does this do to us old timers? It makes us think that the old known â€Å"good order and discipline† is slowly fading. I see young male Soldiers with earring holes in their ears. I even caught a young Soldier wearing an earring on duty. I told him he had five seconds to take it off or else†¦ He complied. I believe that this is today’s norm, but is society slowly slipping too far? How about going to a lawyer’s office and seeing a lawyer with an earring and tattoo on his neck? I’ve seen lawyers with earrings before.But how professional is this? I personally would not like to be represented by someone like that. A judge may discriminate and it may cause someone to lose a case. Other issues are perception. Looking at someone with multiple tattoos may give people a bad first impression on an individual. These young Soldiers will someday leave the Army and look for a job. The tattoos may cause them a job. They can be highly qualified, but they are still subject to discrimination. When I see a young Soldier saying that he or she is going to get a tattoo, I tell them to think about it real well. Think of how it may affect their future.

Human Rights Essay

Human Rights are those rights that are deemed to belong to all individuals by virtue of their humanity 1. Previously, these rights were referred to as â€Å"the rights of man† or natural rights. Because of this, human rights are ascribed to all humanity regardless of their citizenship or nationality. The human rights doctrine can, in this respect, come into direct conflict with other doctrines of the sovereignty of other governments in the world, and the law, because of the universality that has led to the pursuit of the agenda of human rights at stages of international co-operation in the era of post war2. The Human Rights Act has elicited a lot of divided opinion. Debate has risen in Britain as whether to repeal the Human Rights Act, (hereinafter referred to as the HRA), extend it or whether it should be replaced altogether with the British Human Rights (Hereinafter referred to BHR)3. Repealing the HRA refers to abolishing or evoking the act altogether while extending it will imply that, this Act could stay on longer without being repealed or cancelled by the British Government. In Britain, some fundamental individual freedoms are today protected by the Human Rights Act of 1998 which requires all the Britain law to obey the European Convention of 1950 on Human Rights (hereinafter ‘The ECHR’) and which also makes it possible for the convention to be enforceable in all the British Courts and makes it mandatory for the Judiciary to interpret the local law so that it complies with the convention4. The act came into existence over ten years and it seeks to protect the individual rights of people and has had a lasting impact in many fields of their private and public lives. The HR integrated the ECHR into the British law and therefore made it unlawful for any Public body or officer to act or behave in way which is incompatible with the convention5. The 1998 HRA made the ECHR to be part and parcel of the British National Law. Before that, the courts were only allowed to take the ECHR in very limited circumstances during domestic proceedings6. However, section 19 of the Act made it mandatory for any future legislation to contain compatibility with the ECHR. The Human Rights Act was in 1998 hailed to be a landmark statute but has elicited a lot of controversy and misconception. The HRA of 1998 has brought some certain elements into the legal system of Britain about the Human Rights of the European convention. In this Act, the British Courts are required to uphold and apply the ECHR in each and every decision that they make. This convention was developed to safeguard against the rejuvenation of Nazism and the protection of the rights it sought to protect after the Second World War7. The Articles which are contained in the Human Rights Convention proclaim among others the right to life which is contained in Article 2, prohibition of torture of human beings which is contained in Article 3, the prohibition of forced labor and slavery which is contained in Article 4, the right to security and liberty which is contained in Article 5, the right to a fair and just trial which is contained in article six, the prohibiting of extra legal punishment which is contained in article seven, the right to respect of the private family life of individuals which is contained in Article eight and the freedom of conscience, thought and religion which is contained in article nine. The convention also spells out the liberty of self expression that is found in Article 10 and the freedom of association and assembly that is clearly depicted in article eleven. The right to marriage and the prohibition of discrimination are contained in articles twelve and fourteen respectively 8. The legal modern approach of human rights that binds the governments to this Act arose from the United Nations Declaration on Human rights in 1948 which internationally developed a secular agreement on the rights of the human kind to provide the means through which the desire of the governments of the world could be able to prevent the recurrence of atrocities which were committed in WWII through setting of a common standard for all people and states 9. Should we repeal the HRA? The Human Rights Act should be repealed because it undermines the sovereignty of Britain as an independent state and therefore it should not be governed by laws from external sources. Given the fact that Britain is an independent country having its own laws and constitution to guide it in whatever undertakings that concerns it, there is no need for it to incorporate the ECHR since its laws have articles concerning the human rights. There is need to repeal the Human Rights Act because the Human Rights can well be covered under the British Bill of Rights 10.. The Human Rights Act should be repealed because it has undermined the authority of parliament and given the judges the ability to issue any declarations of incompatibility yet these judges have no empowerment to strike down any laws which are incompatible but instead, it is the government which must make a decision as to how to respond to any declaration. By repealing the HRA, the British government could have been empowered to make decisions affecting Britain to solely remain in Britain and by so doing, a culture of self independence will be created and this will enable the British citizens to enjoy their rights alongside the rights of the ordinary citizens in Britain 11. There are those who argue that the HRA should not be repealed but instead, it should be directly incorporated into the British law. This is because, given the fact that there is lack of a codified constitution which sets out the citizen’s rights, the British doctrine for the sovereignty of parliament cannot provide enough protection for the rights of individuals from a government which is intrusive. The HRA can therefore ensure that all these are achieved12. Repealing of the HRA would make the laws under it to be under the control of the Judges in Britain. By so doing, a complicated legal situation could be created and this could lead to threatening of the protection that is currently provided in the European Law on Human Rights. The Human Rights Act should therefore never be repealed or replaced with the British Bill of Rights but instead, it should be extended. This is because the British Courts are a backstop of preventing the infringement of the fundamental rights and as such, they command a great respect from the general public 13. Should we extend the HRA? The HRA should not be extended because it forces the government of Britain to obey the ECHR yet it has its own laws which it is supposed to protect to maintain its sovereignty. Forcing an independent country to obey foreign rules is like colonization and therefore it should not be extended because it infringes on the freedom of Britain as an independent country. The HRA should not be extended by the British Government because it does not deal with big issues of discrimination, torture or slavery and other things which are restricted largely to other countries and of which it is also responsible for the very down to earth principles of the right to privacy, food, housing, equality, health and freedom of speech. The HRA does not reaffirm these obligations in a real way that individuals can be able to forget and seek to set them in history and in stone14. The Human rights Act should be extended because it is a very important piece of legislation which has so far been issued by the British Government 15. The Act will make all the British People to be enlightened with the fact that all people are born with obligations which require them to treat other human beings with dignity and in a way which they also expect to be treated. This dignity is therefore not about philosophy or religion but a matter of consideration for other people and common dece ncy. For Britain to redress the balance, then it will not be easy for it alone, but for the society and a world which bases itself on the respect of human rights to intervene so that the continued struggle aimed at adjusting the current attitudes and explaining to other individuals why there is need to respect other people can be achieved. The Human Rights Act should therefore be extended so that these ideals are realized16. But contrary to this, the HRA should be extended because it does not go far enough and therefore gives numerous states chances in the Human Rights Convention for the governments to opt out of some certain provisions for the sake of their national security. On the contrary, the human Rights Act should not be extended because it could subject some poor citizens of Britain to punishment as a result of having to travel far in search of justice in a foreign court other than seeking justice within the local courts available in their resident country. The further extension of the Human Rights Act in Britain is therefore a blow to the common citizens of Britain 17. The HRA should not be replaced by the British Bill of Rights so that the British parliament cannot be able to abolish the HRA in the same way they do to the other laws. Currently, the HRA has got no privileged position in the British Law and therefore, it can easily be changed in the constitution without the need for special procedures 18. If it is incorporated into the British Bill of Rights (hereinafter â€Å"the BBR), it will become difficult for anyone to easily change it to suit his or her circumstances. The HRA should never be replaced with the British Bill of Rights as suggested by some of the conservatives like David Cameron but it should instead be extended so that that a culture of impunity cannot be created by the government. Calls by the democrats that the Human Rights Act should never be repealed should therefore be never be supported. Instead, the Human Rights Act should be replaced by the British Bill of Rights so that the people of Britain can be able to reaffirm their independence by having their own domestic laws to govern them other than relying on international laws. 19. On the other hand, swapping the HRA with the BBR can be a sure way of restoring the responsibility for the balancing act to politicians in Britain which the general public can easily elect or boot out according to their preferences. Indeed, the establishment of the BBR will make the British government to have absolute power as a result of the rediscovered freedom which will positively develop democracy in and justice in the country. Should we replace the HRA with the BBR? The Human Rights Act should be replaced with a Bill of Rights because this Act is a means through which some parts of Human Rights contained in the European Convention are brought into the British Law books. The HRA clearly sets out the responsibilities of the people of Britain as a society since with any form of legislation; different people would often try to seek interpretation of its content to satisfy their own selfish ends. In essence, such people will popularly start shouting about the trampling and violation of human rights in any case the other channels are exhausted but funnily enough, this is possible because of the real principle which is enacted in the Human Rights Act itself20. Some people argue that the HRA should not be replaced with the British Bill of Rights so that rogue politicians are tamed by laws which are universally established and recognized. Given the fact that the decisions will remain in the country and not subject to laws from outside, it will create more room for bribery to exist and develop roots since people who make major decisions about human rights are located in one specific county. Attempts to replace the HRA with the British Bill of Rights should be discarded because it could be detrimental to the British people. People are entitled towards voicing their opinions if they feel there is violation of their human rights. The Act therefore, remains the best for delivering justice to all people without any fear or favor 21. The HRA should be extended because it gives the British people the legal rights to stand up and be counted and should not be discounted like any other politically correct set of legislation. For the British people to better understand the Human Rights Act at its infancy, then they have to be aware that they have rights to know what their law makers do on their behalf and not solely rely on the media for the interpretation of the law decisions since they can easily be outraged by headlines which are too sensational. Since all the British people are members of their respective societies, then they have to bring with them responsibilities along with the rights because it is their responsibility to know that as much as they may be incensed with the headlines, they are the same laws which protect them as individuals and as a community 22 The British government should therefore not diminish the Human Rights Act but instead better understand and appreciate it. There should be no retreat over the Human Rights Act and its critics should be brought on board to understand the benefits it brings the country. The Human Rights Act should be extended because the creation of the British Bill of Rights will not make it possible for the incorporation and builds on the British obligations which are incorporated in the ECHR. This is because once the laws are enshrined in the British Law, then all the Human Rights Act could have totally been overhauled and replaced by the British Bill of Rights. Rather than the British government seeks to diminish or repeal the Human Rights Act, it should instead extend it and commit itself fully to the ECHR23. The British government should also be aware that by seeking to swap the HRA with the BBR, then they could have opened up room for the creation of significant legal problems which would arise as a result of reduction of any of the protections which are guaranteed and contained under the ECHR. The HRA should not be repealed because in any case it was to be repealed, and then it will not make any major difference because even if the parliament repeals it, the Courts can, by themselves, decide to enforce it anyway. According to the President of the Supreme Court in Britain, no great impact could be achieved if parliament chose to repeal the Human Rights Act because to him, the Act has already achieved the â€Å"Constitutional Statutes† which render them very impossible to repeal24. The Human Rights Act 1998 should be upheld and even be extended because it has changed the constitutional role of the British Courts as far as domestic legislation is concerned since all legislation in Britain must now be fully interpreted in accordance with the rights contained in the European convention. The implementation of the Human Rights Act has therefore changed the way the constitution has evolved and also changed the roles of the judiciary. This is because the judiciary has adapted so as to incorporate the HRA25. The Human Rights Act should be repealed or replaced by the British Bill of Rights since it is clear that in circumstances where it is difficult to interpret legislation in line with the European Community on Human Rights convention, then the British law will be given prevalence over the contravention. The Human Rights Act should be re-branded into the British Bill of Rights because it can n improve the public’s perception26. This is true because it is Act’s text that critics of the Human Rights are against and they are against the public bodies the decisions by the courts that people do not like. We should therefore, repeal or even substitute the HRA with the BBR before it even survives the stage of adolescence because the politicians who are very well known for permitting internment on a yearly basis cannot be trusted to build on the existing freedoms and rights but instead, they will aim at destroying the same27. The Human Rights Acts of 1998 which incorporated the ECHR into British law should not be repealed or even be replaced by the BBR because it gives the citizens statutory rights to enable them enforce their Human Rights in any Court in Britain 28. These rights were brought home by the integration of the ECHR, and therefore, made it easier for British Citizens to access them locally in their national courts. The incorporation of these conventions into the British laws therefore, not only provided a ceiling but also a floor for human rights. The Human Rights Act should be extended because it gives parliament the freedom to enhance the rights for instance by a Freedom of information Act which is contained in article 40. The British citizens were very privileged after the full implementation of the Human Rights Act in the year 2000 because they were able to claim their rights under legislation in a British Court rather than in Strasbourg where the final arbiter on interpretation of the convention of the ECHR is located. It should therefore, be noted that the sole reason of introducing the HRA in Britain was actually to bring the rights home to the people of Britain29. The Human Rights Act should not be extended because it does not in any way create new human rights or take away any existing human rights. Instead, the HRA followed the devastation that was caused by the World War II and aimed at protecting the basic freedoms and rights of the British people. The HRA seeks to enable the British Citizens to enforce their human rights locally in the courts in the UK without necessarily taking their cases to Strasbourg through provision of easier and better access to rights which currently exist. On the hand, extending the Human Rights Act is beneficial for the British people because those people who are against it have been known to have moral laxity and ignorance of the law. This is because the Human Rights Act empowers people to promote their interests. The human Rights Act should be upheld and extended because it belongs to all the human kind on account of their humanities and not based on the membership of the narrower classifications like ethnicity, class or citizenship. Unlike the British Bill of Rights which may tend to exclude by definition the non-citizens of a country from its protection, the Human Rights Act seeks to protect every human being regardless of where one comes from, the skin color, age or gender. Individuals like the undocumented employees, a single mum who loses all her benefits and the inmates in Guantanamo Bay actually lack the state or law which can protect them. For such people to enjoy the benefits of humanity and the rights associated with it, passing of a new British Bill of rights or keeping the initial Human Rights Act adds nothing to their lives30. The HRA should not be extended because it does not enlarge the remedies or rights of people in the United Kingdom whose rights in the convention have been violated but instead it enables those remedies and rights to be enforced and asserted by the domestic courts in Britain and not by recourse in Strasbourg. The Act should be extended because since its implementation, it has had a great deal of positive influence on the British Courts and therefore led to substantial improvement on the quality of public administration by the Executive, the public bodies, the Judges and the parliament in general. The replacement of the Human Rights Act by the British Bill of Rights will compromise the quality of these public administration institutions31. The Human Rights Act should not be repealed because it could lead to the prevention of the United Kingdom citizens from exercising their fundamental rights in the UK Courts and therefore leading to prolonged delays for the citizens who would be forced to present their appeals to the European Community on Human Rights in Strasbourg in order to assert their rights. The HRA should be replaced by the BBR as suggested by the British government which pointed out that they may build on the HRA to build a British Bill of Duties and rights. However such an attempt by the government is prone to bring success because of questions that have been raised in relation with these proposals. Among the questions that have been raised are whether there exist things like the rights for the British people or the British rights and how such rights can effectively operate within the framework of devolution to Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Questions have also been raised as to whether there should be any inclusion of the economic and social rights within the British Bill of rights. The Human Rights Act should therefore be left the way it is and never be replaced by the British Bill of Rights because it could lead to so many legal complications in Britain32. The Human Rights Act should not be replaced into British Human Rights because the Bill of Rights could bring in ideas of making some of the additional rights in the Bill of Rights to be justifiable and therefore making the judiciary to further expand its scope of influence on issues which could be better handled by the parliamentarians. The HRA should not be replaced by the British Bill of Rights because there is a lot of confusion which has continued to reign as to whether the New Bill of Rights would comfortably sit alongside the Human Rights Act or it would be a direct replacement of the Human Rights Act. Instead of having two documents which would be unhelpful to the people it will be preferable to have a single document (the Human Rights Act) which adds to the ECHR33. The Human Rights Act should be repealed or even be replaced by the British Bill of Rights depending on the public good because it was enacted by parliament in 1998 and should therefore be fully discussed to determine whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. The British government should therefore place its focus on the human rights as a way of justifying and improving the official decision making rather than automatically making it to become a legal issue. In cases where the public authorities feel the need to tamper with the individual human rights, then must have genuine motives and follow fair and just procedures. In addition, the Act should not be repealed or be replaced by the British Bill of Rights because it is good for the British people. What needs to be done is to improve education about the Human Rights Act among the public to ensure that it occupies a more strategic position in schools and colleges. This is the right time to sell the true values of the Human Rights Act to the general public, something that has never been done after the Act became effective. By so doing, the public would be in a better position to be informed as to whether to repeal the Human Rights Act, repeal it or extend it34. People who support the HRA rgue that it should be extended because it is the safe and sure channel of giving protection to the marginalized and most vulnerable members of any society. They claim that anyone who is in Britain for any reason is entitled towards fundamental human rights which the public and the government are duly and legally obliged to obey and respect. This is because the Human Rights Act of 1998 made them to become law. Similarly, the Act should be extended because the rights contained in the convention not only deals with matters of death and life but also affects the rights possesses by people in their everyday life reflected in what they do, say and their beliefs.

Disadvantages of Globalization Essay

Globalization is any company’s target. However, it should be noted that globalization has disadvantages as well as advantages. One of the disadvantages of globalization is the over-standardization of products through global branding. Using Emirate Airline to illustrate this point, globalization will means that their services are standardized which aim to serve all customers. They would lose their uniqueness of the business culture after they go global. Also, the over-globalization will result in the lack of creativity and product diversity. Moreover, globalization can also create diseconomies of scale as not all countries have the same growth and economic cycle. For example, Emirate may operate very well in the Middle East and Europe market but expanding into Asia or America market will reduce their profit. This could be due to difficulties of coordinating activities in those new markets or the culture differences. It is also important to note that globalization will cause de- industrialization and high unemployment in the domestic market Segmentation, Targeting and Positioning Any business can not afford to promote their product in the similar ways using similar strategies. This is because not all products can serve the same requirements and demands. However, it is very important that customers are aware of the brand’s existence and the unique selling point of the product and brand must be well communicated to the user. Thus, businesses use segmentation, targeting and positioning (STP) to find their customers and target them so that they can promote their product in the most efficient way. The first step of product promotion or even when product is just at its research stage is segmentation. Segmentation is the division of a broad market in smaller categories consisting of individuals with the similar characteristics. These individuals tend to show similar thinking and perception towards products and brands. When the market fluctuates or a new identical product is introduced to the market, customers in the same segment usually have the same respond to the market and the product. In a simple word, market segmentation can be called grouping as it group people with similar characteristics and thinking together. In the case of Nokia, market segmentation is very important as it significantly enhance the sales process and the brand image of the firm. Nokia has many different lines of products so segmentation is on crucial process in its operation. Nokia segmentation could be kids, male, female, high income customer, low income customer, young people and etc. Targeting is the next phase of the STP process. Targeting is done after the broad market has been segmented. Targeting involves devising various marketing strategies and promotional schemes according to the preferences of the different segments. Targeting is important as it could help an organization to reduce unnecessary promotion cost and also boost sale results of the product. As in the case of Nokia, they create phone for almost every segment so targeting them to the right segment will boost their sale results. For example, the Nokia cheaper line such as Nokia 1100, 1200, 1208 are aimed at people with lower income or as a secondary phone. On the other hand, Nokia 8800 is aimed at successful business man and their new smart phones are aim at young, middle income people. Positioning is the last stage of the STP process. After a company has done the market segmentation and targeting, it will work hard to create a good impression of its products in the target customers’ perception. Product positioning is what customers believe about the product’s value, features and benefits. It is important that the customers have a good perception over the product at the beginning stage of positioning otherwise, the product success will be quite challenging. By getting it right, positioning helps organization to create a good perception of the products in the minds of target audience. Using the case of Nokia, after they segment and target their customers, they could improve the product positioning by creating unique point of the product that fits well with the targeted customers. For example, for female target, Nokia could create product in more feminine colors such as white, pink and etc.

Mahatma Gandhi Essay

Mahatma Gandhi Leadership Style The Father of the Nation is now being held up as the master strategist, an exemplary leader, and someone whose ideas and tactics corporate India can emulate. Gandhi reinvented the rules of the game to deal with a situation where all the available existing methods had failed. He broke tradition. He understood that you cannot fight the British with force. So he decided to change the game in a fundamentally different way. He unleashed the power of ordinary people, inspired women and men in the country to fight under a unifying goal. Resource constraint did not bother him. That was the motivation. Gandhi’s leadership style is being termed as ‘follower-centric’ and one that took into account existing conditions before determining the strategy. Gandhi advocated having leadership styles that were dependent on the circumstances. When Gandhi was in South Africa, he launched his protests in a suit and a tie. But when he came back to India, he thought of  khadi  (handspun and hand-woven cloth) and launched non-violent protests on a greater scale, It shows that Gandhi’s leadership style was situational leadership style. A Quote from the book: Count your chickens before they hatch by Arindam Chaudhuri â€Å"Mahatma Gandhi’s example to me is a perfect case of adopting styles to suit the culture. The country today stands divided on whether what he did was good or bad†¦ I just know one thing: there was never a leader before him nor one after him who could unite us all and bring us out in the streets to demand for what was rightfully ours. To me, he is the greatest leader  our land has ever seen. It is ‘Theory ‘I’ management’ at its practical best: productively and intelligently utilizing whatever the resource you are endowed with,† says Chaudari.

Project management risk management Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Project management risk management - Essay Example Risk can be defined as the possibility of loss. Risk arises due to the inability to achieve objectives within defined cost, schedule and technical constraints. Risk has two components, one the possibility of not achieving a particular outcome, and the second is the result of failure to achieve the outcome. The former is the probability of risk and the later is the loss. Risk management is a set of action that help the managers plan to deal with uncertain occurrences. It is through risk management managers assess risk and manage to reduce it to an acceptable level. The key idea in risk management is not to wait passively for a risk to materialize and become a problem. The objective of risk management is to ensure that for each perceived risk we know well in advance how to tackle it. The process of risk management begins during the analysis phase and the actual process of managing risks continues throughout. Risk management is a dynamic process because it deals with the activities that are yet to happen. Risk management has two fold agenda. First deciding actions for preventing risk from happening and second deciding actions for tackling risk that materialize. Therefore risk management is all about preempting a risk, coming up with a plan for resolving the risk and finally executing the plan. Risk identification: In this step manager gathers information about the potential risks in the project. The project manager plans the strategies for avoiding risks or controlling them. They discuss availability of technology, manpower, prevailing environment and the project related factors. The manager picks up the thread from these and creates a risk log. After risk log is prepared, the project manager calls a meeting within the team and technical experts to discuss the risk log and the mitigation plans. One of the effective ways of identifying risks is using a questionnaire to list out risks. Risk analysis: It consists of three steps i.e. Risk probability, Risk impact and Risk factor. After identifying the risks the manager needs to analyze the risks. Uncertainty and loss are the two characteristics of risk. The uncertainty factor in risk means that the unknown event may or may not happen. While analyzing risk manager needs to quantify the level of uncertainty and the degree of loss. Based on this, manger plans schedules and costs. During analysis, information on risk is converted into information on decision-making. There are various tasks involved in risk analysis; initially the task in risk analysis phase is to describe the risk. The risk can be product related, process related, organization related, client related or infrastructure related, secondly the manager quantifies the probability of occurrence of risk and thirdly the risks are rated depending on their probability of occurrence. Based on the probability of risk the manager identifies the impact of risk on cost, schedule, and quantity, which needs to be calculated and graded. Each risk is prioritized relative to other risks. The manager can prioritize risks based on the probability and impact of risks. High impact risks with moderate to high probability will catch the attention first. Risk Mitigation: Risk mitigation is the best possible approach adopted by the manager to avoid risks from occurring. The probability of