Saturday, August 17, 2019

Alfred Russel Wallace Essay

There are numerous advances caused by the development of science and technology in human life. Such discoveries and inventions led to the advancement of human civilization. Many definitive statements were given about science and most of these statements focus on the conventional approach in scientific endeavors. Little or no definitions were formulated exercising other non-conventional approach in doing researches in the field of science. Aside form the fact that there are other factors involved in recognizing one’s work and classifying it as a work of scientific methodology, human interventions on these processes are still influential in determining a specific work and accept it as a valid scientific research. As a result, proper recognition of a person’s work greatly depends on these limited criteria which are based on a narrow A person named Wallace ventured into the works of discovering things that he thought then as part of the laws of nature. He worked on the same area with Sir Charles Darwin with his evolution theory and findings. During that time, Wallace findings were not classified as a work of science due to a lot of reasons and as a result, he was not recognized then as a scientist but an outsider. Science then was defined in a narrowed approach wherein it encompasses only limited principles and classifications. A specific study can only be classified as a work of science when it is associated with human intervention brought about by the search for facts. All supernatural phenomenons were ruled out of contention and only those studies that involve findings from thorough experimentation are considered. Studies should follow the causality rule and must follow the laws of physics. Wallace study did not fall into this classification, thus, making his research disqualified. There are researches in the historical accounts that lead to statements that Wallace’s work did not suffice to the lists of scientific works. The authority responsible during that time in recognizing a work is the British Association. This body was founded by persons who hold good positions in the society. These people dictate the decision of the organization about the funding and citations of a given work. These people saw Wallace works as unacceptable and radically made, making it excluded from further recognition of the body. Religion also has a big factor in making up restrictions in the researches being made by people which provides a definite line between topics that are allowed to be studied and those that are not. Their decisions were greatly influenced by the social, political, and cultural aspects which was very evident on the group’s dealings with Wallace and his research. Accounts tell about the decision of the British Association tagging Wallace’s work to be excluded for reasons including the fact that his findings only repeats that of Darwin’s theories about evolution. Another factor that made Wallace unfit to be called as a scientist is because he has no formal schooling, a clear standard emphasized by the body who classifies researches and studies to be scientific or not. Wallace belongs to the labor sector compared to those individuals who were classified to belong in the upper class. For some people, these criteria are unfair and uncalled for since this focuses on the personal circumstances of a person and not on his works or contributions. However, the decision made can also be traced with other factors other than what was classified to be more of a personal attack on a person’s life. Wallace developed his interests in the evolution topics during his stint as a land surveyor in England. He combined several disciplines in his works and findings in his field of interests which is on the evolution theory. During that time, evolution was unacceptable and firmly rejected by the church ministers and their teachings. As an advocate of evolution principle, Wallace continued with his study and made declarations that were found out to be eccentric. He included in his paper the principles that humans and orangutans have direct relationship with each other. He accepted this principle of believing people really came from the ape ancestors. These findings were made years before other papers were written establishing the same principle as he has made. His work and that of Darwin has a strong correlation but what made its distinction is that Darwin’s result was very conservative and was carefully illustrated in a well mannered style. He still declared the superiority of white men over the people who lived before, different from Wallace’s declaration on the same concept of study. His findings did not found enough support from the British land where conservatism and religion matters a lot. He did not receive due acknowledgments for his work but Darwin did have the recognition for the same work he has. However, this scenario did not bother him and he continued his openness in his works and findings. Such situation that happened to Wallace should open up the minds of other people who sees things only as they want to see. There should be no distinctions between individuals who have submitted their studies and researches that belong to various states in life. The concerned body responsible for the recognition of such works should be aware that having a formal education should not be a major factor in considering a person to be a great scientist or not. What should matter is the validity of the results obtained by the study and the totality of the work submitted by any individual hoping for due recognition. Each should keep in mind that what matters are the character and dedication in the work like that of Wallace’s. Even he was not recognized then, it cannot be denied that Wallace still has a vital contribution in our present society and he can be considered to be one of the giants that made us see things that we have and developed for our society as a whole. Works Cited Alfred Russel Wallace: A Capsule Biography. Retrieved on January 27, 2009. Retrieved from < www. wku. edu> Quanmen, D. (2008). The Man that wasn’t Darwin. Retrieved on January 26, 2009. Retrieved From

Friday, August 16, 2019

Dance Helicap Essay

In 1967, Frank Dance proposed the communication model called Dance’s Helix Model for a better communication process. The name helical comes from â€Å"Helix† which means an object having a three-dimensional shape like that of a wire wound uniformly around a cylinder or cone. He shows communication as a dynamic and non-linear process. Theory Dance’s model emphasized the difficulties of communication. Frank Dance uses the form of a Helix to describe communication process. He developed this theory based on a simple helix which gets bigger and bigger as it moves or grows. The main characteristic of helical model of communication is that it is evolutionary. Frank Dance explains the communication process based on this Helix structure and compares it with communication. In the Helix structure, the bottom or starting is very small then it’s gradually moves upward in a back and forth circular motion which form the bigger circle in the top and it’s still moves further. The whole process takes some time to reach. As like helix, the communication process starts very slowly and defined small circle. Communicators share information only with small portion of themselves to their relationships. Its gradually develops into next level but which will take some time to reach and expanding its boundaries to the next level. Later the communicators commit more and share more portions themselves. Example When a child is born the only means of communication is crying, he/she cries for everything like hunger, pain, cold etc.. As the child grows the means of communication become wider and broader. He learns to makes noises then he learns language to obtain attention and to fulfil his needs. As a Helix the process of communication in this case started from crying and later it developed into a complex and compound means. The Helical model of communication is largely dependent on its past. A child learns to pronounce a word in his elementary classes and throughout his life he uses that word in the same way he learnt. Just like that we used to react to certain things in a certain way in our childhood and such reactions and habits lasts with us forever. The communication evolves in the beginning in some simple forms then the same process of communication develops based on the past activities. It develops further with modifications. Conclusion Frank Dance included the concept of time in his theory. Something happens over the other will always be based on the first event according to him. This theory of communication was a subject to a number of experimental researches. Even though this model of communication clarifies everything there is a problem of over simplification. According to this theory a communication process is the product of what we learnt. Let us understand the model with the help of an example. A child from the very moment he comes to this world starts communicating. When a baby is born, the nurse rubs his back to make the child cry. If the child doesn’t cry, it is an indication of a still born child. What does crying in this case refer to? It is actually a way the child is communicating to his parents that he is alive, absolutely hale and hearty and ready to face the challenges of the world. As the child grows up, he cries whenever he is hungry or expects something from his parents and sometimes simply for his parent’s attention. It is again a child’s own way of conveying his message to the whole world. When the same child grows up and starts going to school, he soon interacts with his parents, teachers, friends in the form of words. Now crying actually gets replaced by words or his speech but one thing which is common is the process of communication which existed since the child’s birth. Thus the child actually started communicating from the very first day of his life and has been communicating all through till the present day. This explains one part of helical model of communication. According to the Helical model of communication, the process of communication evolves from the very birth of an individual and continues till the existing moment. All living entities start communicating from the very first day of their origin. When seeds are planted, they convey the message to the gardener that they need to be watered daily and should be treated well with fertilizers and manure. When a plant emerges from the seed it also starts communicating its need for water, sunlight, manure and fertilizers, thus supporting the Helical model of communication. The same also applies for animals, birds, fishes and all living creatures. Now let us throw some more light on a real life situation An individual in his elementary classes learns to pronounce a particular word or react to a particular situation. It has been observed that even though the child grows up, he continues to pronounce that particular word in the same way as he did during his growing up days or for that matter, if the same situation arises again he would under all circumstances react in the same way as he did in the past. The fear of the child when suddenly the light goes off at night resulting in a complete blackout is present in his younger days as well as when he grows up. The above example again makes the Helical model of communication clear. According to the Helical model as the process of communication moves forward it also comes back and is largely dependent on the past behaviour of the individual. The model believes that communication process is just like a helix which moves forward as well as comes backward and is dependent on the behaviour patterns of the past definitely with some modifications and changes. As the child grows up, he does make slight changes in his past body movements or past pronunciation or facial expressions. He makes certain changes, modifications in his communication and tries to get rid of the communication errors. An individual will definitely get less nervous in his teenage days as compared to his childhood days, thus a slight change in his behaviour.

Thursday, August 15, 2019

Tremaine Neverson

â€Å"Success can be a dangerous drug. It definitely changes people and it can take you to another world if you allow it to. † These are famous words form popular singer, songwriter and activist Tremaine Aldon Neverson. Born November 28, 1984, Tremaine is also known as Trey Songz. Searching for himself, he gained a love for music and began singing at the age 14. At the age of 15, he met a producer by the name of Troy Taylor, whom started his skyrocketing success as a singer. In 2003, he released his first album, and then began writing music for other artists.He has five different albums in which he considers to take his fans on five different journeys of his life. From BET to Grammy awards, Trey Songz is more than just an artist. He has used his gift of music as the launching pad to various philanthropic and entrepreneurial endeavors such as the â€Å"Angels with Heart Foundation† and the â€Å"Songz for Peace Foundation. † Through his â€Å"Angels with Heart Fo undation,† Trey encourages to give back and to have a positive impact in their community through community service with local charities and random acts of kindness. Through his â€Å"Songz for Peace Foundation† he aims to curb the violence in youth.I admire Trey’s dedication to music. It is something he loves and he always pleases his fans. He is also promoting positive messages through each of his foundations. As an artist, he’s only obligated to deliver music and videos to his fans, but he does so much more for us. I am all for community service and giving back to the community, so just for that I admire him. To find someone who satisfies your taste in music and your taste in activism means a lot to me as a fan and a young adult. In closing, I would like to dedicate this special tribute to Tremaine Neverson on this very special day, Happy Birthday Trey!

Wednesday, August 14, 2019

Buried Secrets: Truth and Human Rights in Guatemala Essay

During the late 70’s and 80’s, Guatemala experienced the wrath of Hades as the Guatemalan army conducted a genocidal campaign against the Maya through massive violence and terrorism. This campaign was known at first as â€Å"La Situacion† but after the peace accord was signed down in 1996 the persecuted Maya used a more appropriate terminology and called it as â€Å"La Violencia†. Because of the economic sabotage of several Guerilla movements, the government was forced to â€Å"cleanse† Guatemala. Two hundred thousand people, mostly Mayan, were persecuted and murdered and one and a half million people from six hundred twenty six villages were put out of place. Victoria Sanford used the power of language in her book â€Å"Buried Secrets: Truth and Human rights in Guatemala† by gathering more than four hundred testimonies and interviews from forensic experts, human rights activists, military officers, government officials, guerilla soldiers and survivors that seeks community healing, truth and justice. The book provides genuine perspective into the experiences of the survivors as they fight to rebuild their lives and devastated community and more importantly, it shows how these testimonials became evidence of finding truth and justice for the Mayans in Guatemala. Also, the book gave emphasis on the new way of genocide the Guatemalan army carried out. People who agree with the notion that human rights are anthropology’s most important scholarly and political concern would admire Sanford’s book. Sanford sympathetically and critically documents and analyzes one of the most inhuman events in American history, the genocide against the Maya population. She observed the participants with the Guatemalan Forensic Anthropology Foundation as they disinterred concealed graves, which enabled her to execute what she calls as â€Å"excavation of memories† (p.17) through collecting testimonies from survivors. She used her multisided ethnography to argue persuasively the reformation of genocide from a violent intrusion of villages to the massacre of its inhabitants and to continuous experience of aggression. This point of view is carried out from five intertwined chapters – 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 – in which Sanford explained genocide as a process rather than an event. The first stage is the militarization of the villages where the army would intrude the villages and accuse its inhabitants as sympathizers of the guerillas, specifically the Guerilla Army of the Poor, the Revolutionary Organization of Armed People, the Rebel Armed Forces, and the Guatemalan Labor Party. Villagers are then massacred by the Guatemalan army. At first, only men are murdered but at the end of the reign of terror, children and women will also be slaughtered. The army will further punish the so-called sympathizers by burning all the structures and crops leaving no place for shelter and source of living. Survivors will then flee to the mountains to hide but the army would follow and hunt them. Who ever they’ll see will either be killed or forced to join the army control. The intolerable difficulties that hiding in the mountains brings – starvation and diseases – would make the survivors surrender to the army. Those who joined the army would be sent to model villages. These are army controlled towns which came from the original lands that the Mayas possess. After being placed in model villages, the survivors would be brainwashed by the army to erase whatever sympathy with the guerillas they still have. The final step is the lurking memories of terror the army gave to the survivors. Democracy and justice is taken away from the captives making them more vulnerable from emotional stress. Sanford shows that the redefinition of mass killing and the survivors that suffered a long way during that era and told their stories through testimonies could begin the healing process. At first, this would be simply a psychological help but as one goes on, he can get the sympathy of other people that can help them rebuild their destroyed lands and unsecured futures. The author resists the desire to breakdown the stories of the survivors, but instead, she synthesized them creating a whole picture of violence and inhuman activities. The power of the book is that Sanford did not create the events and the characters. All are real events experienced by real people. Sanford’s gathered testimonies have the power to transform a private memory into a public space, where the survivors has the courage to speak. It gets away from the government’s negotiation of life-shattering events. (p. 12). Although Sanford saw hope in her field work and analysis, the issue of impunity one of her informants raised is a critical concern. The author recounts a horrible experience of a doctor whose patient was murdered while lying down on the operating table. With the doctor plastered against wall, three men with guns shot the patient to death. As the doctor said to the author, it is all about privileges, the protection from punishment of the act itself when those gun shooters did not even wear masks so as not to be recognized considering that they live in the vicinity is so visible. One of them actually lives on the same street as the doctor, and each time the doctor runs into him, he relives the moments of that murder. He sees that man every single day and the freedom is so great that the murderer does not even droop his head to express fear from justice. (p. 35). In a world where forensic anthropologists receive death threats and increasing criminal violence fills every published newspaper, a skeptic may ask, is speaking and gathering truth worth the risk just to empower equality among races? The book demonstrates clearly how the power of testimonies can help transform a land of havoc and wrath into a land of democracy and peace. Language became a powerful tool in fighting the advocacy of violence. It was evident on many parts of the book. The Maya, by being able to tell their adventurous but somewhat horrific plight, took their persecutor’s remaining authority. Also, language has become a tool for both the political and physical of space for the resistors. Language helped the genocide victims by excavating their graves and giving them decent funerals. But in order for an excavation to be carried out, it should be first decided by the court. If the court decides the approval of an excavation, testimonies are gathered to locate the mass grave and identify the found bodies. The act of excavation, which is aided by the power of testimonies, is then again a part of the healing process. The survivors who submit a petition to the court for the excavation of the bodies of their loved ones is engaged in a political process that was forbidden from them before. In this case, democracy at its least essence has become transparent. This shows that at the least, spiritual justice is obtained by those who have been brutally killed and by the relatives and friends of the bodies recovered. In addition to the author’s intervention on international human rights by writing about the reformation of genocide, she highlights the importance of the Maya survivors as a tool in history for achieving freedom and justice for those who had experience the tyranny of the army. She directly challenges the people, like the Guatemalan army, who tried to discredit her informant’s testimonies. As in the original story on which it is based, it’s analysis is of the same racist theoretical foundation that resists political consciousness and free will to the Maya whose perception, being manipulated, means to remove the society, individual memory and organization. (p. 49). By gathering information from the survivors, Sanford shows how anthropologists can aid democratic social projects. Now, though Guatemala failed to combat impunity, peace implementation and legislation to improve political awareness and participation, the current administration made progress by taking state responsibilities on some human rights violations that occurred during â€Å"La Violencia† and by supporting human rights internationally. Though the testimonies and the expertise of Sanford in anthropology did not fully helped Guatemala, evidence shows that improvements are being made to this country. The book clearly explores the intersection of memory, history and testimonies as it emphasize that through it, power from language can give the survivors power to work within a larger political system. At the end, the survivors redeemed power by the use of judicial system to attain their long-lost aspiration of truth, justice and democracy and the courts played a major role for the survivors to regain power. They decided whether to excavate the graves of the victims of genocide, they have trials for the perpetuators of genocide and most importantly, they helped in uncovering the truth behind the long violence that happened. Works Cited: Victoria Sanford. (2003). Buried Secrets: Truth and Human Rights in Guatemala. Palgrave Macmillian. New York   

Compare and Contrast Two Books Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Compare and Contrast Two Books - Essay Example The workers were immigrants at the beginning of the twentieth century and are still immigrants today. Only their nationality has changed. A hundred years ago they were Eastern European and Caucasian. They emigrated from the then economically troubled nations of Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania, and Germany on board passenger ships traversing the Atlantic, travelling third-class or steerage. They entered the United States legally through the main immigration gateway at Ellis Island outside the New York harbor. Some of their number included children and younger women. (Sinclair, p. xxi) Today, they are of Latin origins, predominately Mexican, travelling, more often than not, illegally across the southern border of the United States on foot or by car, truck, or bus. And far more of their numbers are women than one hundred years ago. (Schlosser, The manner in which the workers live has also changed only on the surface, but the deeper characteristics of their lives remain a constant. The location of slaughterhouses in the nineteenth century began in the midst of large urban areas such as Chicago. (Sinclair, p. xxxiii) In the latter part of the twentieth century it was discovered that moving them closer to the feedlots was more economically efficient, and thus they are now located close to stockyards and feedlots in rural, agricultural areas of the United States. (Schlosser, web book) However, moving the workplace did not change the location or living conditions of the workers. One hundred years ago they lived â€Å"Back of the Yards†, in substandard housing within walking distance of the plants. The rancid odor of the plant and the thick acrid smoke of the factory smokestacks were their daily air supply. Organic waste was daily pumped into the Chicago River which also

Tuesday, August 13, 2019

Analysis of theoretical explanations of the relationship between Essay

Analysis of theoretical explanations of the relationship between technology and society - Essay Example 2.1 Technological determinism is a reductionist theory which holds the assumption that a society’s technology plays a crucial role in driving the development of its social structure as well as the cultural values (McLoughlin 1999, 32). The social structures evolve as a result of adapting to the technological change. The theory also suggests that technology moves on its own course which is normally independent of the human direction. It is therefore regarded to as an autonomous system which ultimately permeates all other sub systems of a society. Technological determinism contributes to the conclusion that emergence of automated technology inevitably raises the level of skill as well as the autonomy of the work force. According to Webster (2002, 34), technological determinism is also a clear explanation of the relationship between technology and society which asserts that technology plays an important role in determining the social existence within a society. In most instances technological changes act as catalysts for societal change. The changes are either seen as literally outside the context of the society or metaphorically outside the society. In addition, the technological developments take place as a result of natural logic which is not socially or culturally determined. As a result, the developments enact change and social adaptation (McLouglin 1999, 39). 2.3 The reason as to why I think they are perfect examples is due to the impact they have on the society and their autonomy nature. Bearing in mind that technological determinism refers to technology as an autonomous system, the quotes support the idea behind that. For example, robots are slowly being assimilated into the systems of our homes and lives whereby they will play a central role later in the century just like both the internet and combustion do now. In reference to technological determinism, the revolution of

Monday, August 12, 2019

Child Adoptions (Domestic vs International) Research Paper

Child Adoptions (Domestic vs International) - Research Paper Example There are two forms of adoption: international and domestic. Domestic adoption is carried out within a native country of the child. On the other hand, international adoption involves adopting a child from a foreign country. Of the two, international adoption is more involving and hectic. The following discourse seeks to assert that international adoption is more complicated than the domestic one. Introduction Child adoption refers to the process through which a person who is not the biological parent of a child assumes parental responsibilities. The process entails the transfer of all rights and privileges of having the child thereby making one responsible for the child’s welfare. Most common reason for adoption is barrenness (Bharat 32). Unlike guardianship in which a person takes care of a child belonging to the biological parents, adoption provides one with permanent ownership of the child thereby taking full responsibilities and rights of parenting the child. These include renaming the child which is always giving the child a new family name. Additionally, the child assumes the rights and privileges of the new family. Adopted children have the right to inheritance, and consideration in important family functions. The process is emotionally engaging and requires effective consideration. There are two types of adoption: domestic and the international adoptions. ... Discussion International adoption would most likely introduce a child to a totally different culture an aspect that may lead to culture shock. Consequently, getting used to a new culture in the case of international adoption would mean that it is more complicated especially if compared with the domestic one where one is mostly likely to be adopted within the same culture. This is normally the case since the international adoption involves taking a child to a new country. In such a case, the child would be exposed to a new experience since the demographical differences between the adopting and country of origin would be quite imminent. A child would therefore find it quite difficult to cope up with life in the new country. As expected, it would take some time before an adopted child fully adapts to life in the new country. This contributes to the complication in the process in case of international adoption. Legal and constitutional differences between countries complicate internation al adoption. Individual countries have their own regulations and legal practices which their citizens must adhere to before adopting a child. This is usually outlined in the constitutions. The differences in the legal frameworks between countries thus come as a hurdle while adopting a child. For instance, some countries outlaw homosexuality. In such countries, a couple which is homosexual would not be allowed be considered as married. In other nations, people who are homosexuals adopt children who they take care of (Leslie 22). Therefore, an international adoption where a gay person would seek to adopt a child from a country where homosexuality is outlawed would be complicated. This highlights how the process of international adoption might be