The Philosophies of John Stuart Mill as a Guide for the...

The Philosophies of John Stuart Mill as a Guide for the World Dr. Pests comments: This students term paper is a model of how to apply the philosophical concepts of a previous century to our present society. She showed how the ideas of John Stuart Mill can be used by intelligent people to construct a society with more opportunities for women and to insure respect for intellectual freedom. As the world moves into the twenty-first century, it faces many problems. War, disease, over-population, and starvation are examples of problems that have yet to be solved. However, progress has been made in many areas that aid in the reduction of human misery. Diseases, through research and scientific study, are better understood—many that†¦show more content†¦If people around the world would adopt the philosophy of John Stuart Mill, the world might become a more intelligent, and therefore tolerant, place in which to live. John Stuart Mill espoused beliefs on the subjection of women and theism, which, if embraced by the majority of people in the world, would put a stop to much of the oppression the world, now endures. Mill was a philosopher who took the unusual stance that women should be considered equal to men in all respects and given the same opportunities as men. He had very strong feelings on the subject, and in his essay entitled The Subjection of Women he sta tes, ... the principle which regulates the existing social relations between the two sexes--the legal subordination of one sex to the other-4s wrong in itself, and now one of the chief hindrances to human improvement; and that it ought to be replaced by a principle of perfect equality, admitting no power or privilege on the one side, nor disability on the other.1 [1] In this essay Mill admits the difficulty of achieving this, but defends his ideas by showing that the position of authority held by men is not a result of the comparison of several kinds of systems being tried and its having been found to be the best system, but that it is the only system that has ever been tried. As a result, one cannot not use past experience to say that women are incapable of being in positions of authority. In this essay Mill states, In the firstShow MoreRelatedMarx, Mill And Freud s Critique Of Political Economy And The Communist Manifesto Essay1133 Words   |  5 Pagesmerely implicit) notions of freedom and unfreedom we find in the texts we have read by Marx, Mill and Freud. Use the esoteric traditions we have examined thus far (from the Book of Job to Plato) as a comparative yardstick, or point of reference, but without letting them take over the foreground in your paper -- the latter should be reserved for these three figures. Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, and John Stuart Mill are three authors who tackle the topic of freedom in unique ways, but their messages areRead MoreTaking a Look at Utilitarianism655 Words   |  3 PagesIntroduction Living as a utilitarian is more easily expressed than done. Thinking about the betterment of humanity is not something everyone wants to cerebrate or worry about. Ideally, utilitarianism would be prosperous if the view was shared among the world. Coming in from a thoroughly nescient perspective, I was unsure of the possibilities, and unsure of the impact I would have on a topic I knew nothing about. Explanation of Utilitarianism Utilitarianism is the subsistence of pleasure and the absenceRead MoreKant And Mill On Animal Ethics Essay1365 Words   |  6 PagesIn this essay I will begin by explaining the overall views of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill, then compare and contrast the ideas and philosophies of Kant and Mill on Animal Ethics. I believe that Kant, the deontologist, will not care as much about the duty/responsibility between humans and animals as Mill, the utilitarian, who will see the extreme importance of animal ethics. After studying and explaining the views and teachings of these two philosophers I will see if my thesis was correct,Read MoreTaking a Look at Euthanasia1787 Words   |  7 Pagesthis paper I will discuss the details of voluntary euthanasia and why it is considered such a big moral issue. After talking about voluntary euthanasia I will delve into how both Aristotle and John Stuart Mill would view euthanasia. This paper will bring about the ethical theories of both Aristotle an d Mill and relate these theories to the topic of euthanasia. Euthanasia has consistently been a topic of great moral debate for years because it deals with the ending of one’s life. A person carriesRead MoreKant vs. Mill1576 Words   |  7 PagesKant vs Mills in Animal Rights In this essay I will cover the philosophy of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. I will begin by covering Kant perspective of rational beings and his idea of a priori learning. I will then move on to his idea of categorical imparaitive. After Kant I will discuss Mill’s utilitarian theory regarding pleasure and pain. With a better understanding of those I will move to Mill’s idea of a posteriori and hypothetical imperative. Following the ideas of these philosophersRead MoreUtilitarianism And Immanuel Kant1213 Words   |  5 Pageswritings have influenced people all throughout the world. Centuries later, his works still form a major point of reference in studies carried out in the modern world. His writings have brought a new dimension in religion, law and history. Among his many works was the Metaphysics of Morals which is the subject of this paper. His view of morals is that our desires and emotions are categorically imperative, meaning that they are conscience driven. His philosophy is closely related to the golden rule whichRead MoreDeontology Theory : Ethics And Moral Reasoning1137 Words   |  5 Pagescomprehend towards others and how they comprehend toward us. Human activities normally depict one’s ethical nature, adhering to the moral values of the deontology theory. John Stuart Mill, states â€Å"that each individual got benefit only from the nobleness of others, with his own nobleness serving to reduce his own happiness.†(Mill, J. S. 2008) We have happiness and unhappiness that are developed as a consequence of an action; normally people judge their actions solely whether if it is considered rightRead MoreEssay on Kant Vs Mill on the Issue of Lying1764 Words   |  8 Pagesanswer this ethical question, two theorists will be presented for the con and pro side. For the con side, the deontologist Immanuel Kant will be presented with his theory that lying is prohibited under all circumstances, as for the pro side, John Stuart Mill will be presented for the utilitarian theory stating that whichever decision brings out the most happiness is the right decision. After discussing the case, my personal view of what is right will be stated with my own reasons, which is that lyingRead MoreThroughout History, Economists And Philosophers Have Theorized1533 Words   |  7 Pagessociety continues to evolve, it is imperative to improve our economic philosophy to defend against the elimination of competition and ensure equal opportunity for all. If the weaknesses of modern capitalism are addressed, it could propel society to a new level of economic prosperity. While the original objective of an economy is undoubtedly still applicable, economic philosophy must continue to progress with the rest of the world. According to Aristotle, the early purpose of the economy was to maintainRead MoreEssay on Marriage in the Victorian Age1814 Words   |  8 Pages the role of married women has evolved a great deal and they now have rights and privileges. John Stuart Mill was one of the great thinkers of the Victorian era, and his essay The Subjection of Women tells how few privileges women had and that they were slaves to their husbands. He also says that women are their own people and should be free. This was an uncommon view for a man of this time to have. Mill provided a much-needed reality check for the ethical treatment of women, and also generated ideas

Role Theory Free Essays

string(138) " roles because they apply to a wide range of situations and because they tend to alter the meaning and taking up of other types of roles\." Understanding Intimate Partner Violence through Role Theory: A Concept Paper Introducing Role Theory Role theory is a sociological framework that has been used to explain sets of relational patterns between people across varying contexts. It seeks to explain one of the most important characteristics of human social behavior – the fact that how people act, behave and speak are not separate, unique, disconnected but rather, are reflective of certain patterns and arrangements that depend on the social context and the actors in these contexts (Mangus, 1957; Biddle, 1986). To illustrate, within the context of an intimate relationship such as marriage, violence between partners can be tied to the particular patterns and arrangements of acting, behaving and speaking between partners – such as earning money, rearing children, taking care of the home and initiating sexual relations. We will write a custom essay sample on Role Theory or any similar topic only for you Order Now Although several versions of the theory have been explicated by scholars, there appears to be agreement that role theory is mainly about three interrelated concepts: (1) patterned and characteristic social behaviors, (2) parts or identities as assumed by social participants, and (3) scripts or expectations for behavior that are understood and followed by actors in a particular social context (Biddle, 1986). For instance, adopting a role theory perspective to understanding intimate partner violence necessitates looking at the patterned and characteristic social behaviors of intimate partners in a relationship, the parts or identities that each partner plays in the relationship, and the scripts or expectations that are interpreted and adhered to by the partners in a particular relational context, specifically in situations of violent encounters. Furthermore, the theory also allows for an understanding of the relationships among the individual, collective and structural levels of society (Turner, 2001), as it deals with the organization and connection of social behavior between the micro, macro and intermediate levels of society. Thus, within role theory, an analysis of intimate partner violence entails looking into the individual behaviors of partners in a violent relationship and tracing the linkages of these behaviors to the social structures that exist in a particular society. Defining Roles Central to role theory is the concept of role. Several definitions have been ascribed to the concept of role in the literature. On a general level, the concept of role includes a description of behaviors, characteristics, norms and values held by a person (Thomas Biddle, 1966). Another definition identifies role as a cluster of behaviors and attitudes that are understood as belonging together, such that a person is considered as acting consistently when enacting the various components of a single role and variably when he or she fails to do so (Turner, 2001). For instance, the traditional masculine role can be characterized as aggressive, ambitious, dominant, independent and persistent whereas the traditional feminine role can be illustrated as agreeable, courteous, sympathetic, trusting, understanding and warm (Ellington Marshall, 1997). As such, a partner who plays the masculine role must enact behaviors and attitudes that are typical of this role, such as being aggressive, dominant, independent and agentic. For this partner cast in the masculine role, to be passive, dependent and agreeable implies incompatibility with the traditional masculine role. Specifically, a role may refer to behavior that is expected of people who occupy particular social categories such as statuses (or positions) in both formal and informal systems (Montgomery, 1998 as cited in Lynch, 2007; Biddle Thomas, 1979 as cited in Lynch, 2007). Roles may also be reflective of the cultural values and norms in a particular society (Zurcher, 1983 as cited in Lynch, 2007). Roles may also be conceptualized as a resource that social actors try to utilize to achieve certain social goals (Callero, 1994). This assumption suggests two things: (1) that human agency is facilitated and expressed through the use of roles as resources, and (2) that roles are employed as tools in the establishment of social structures (Baker Faulkner, 1991 as cited in Callero, 1994). Most social roles exist in pairs or sets. Thus, roles can be conceptualized as related through distinctive role relationships (Mangus, 1957). As such, there could be no husband role without a wife role and no parent role without a child role. In the context of intimate violence, there exists the perpetrator-victim role set. As organized patterns of social behavior, roles are of several types (Mangus, 1957). Roles may be ascribed to the individual, imposed upon an individual or achieved by the individual (Mangus, 1957). Sex and gender roles are ascribed to or imposed upon an individual (Mangus, 1957). For instance, one has to assume the masculine role if one is male or the feminine role if one is born female. On the other hand, one’s roles in groups and occupational systems, such as leader, mediator or peacemaker, are achieved roles. Roles may also be understood as generic or specific. Some roles may be pervasive, persistent, generalized and highly important to a person’s life while other roles may be limited, subordinate, temporary, isolated and unimportant to a person’s life (Mangus, 1957). To illustrate, in a violent intimate relationship, the roles of perpetrator and victim may be the predominant configuration in the relationship. On the other hand, these roles may also be seen as isolated to particular relational contexts and thus understood as subordinate to other roles such as father, mother, breadwinner and caretaker. Roles may also be highly abstract or they may be concrete (Mangus, 1957). Abstract roles emerge from social systems of statuses and are expressed as generalized moral standards (Mangus, 1957). Examples of abstract roles are evident in universal expectations of honesty and justice. Status roles include rights and duties that emanate from a given position or office (Mangus, 1957). Illustrations of status roles can be seen in the entitlements and obligations that are given to persons of authority, such as managers, leaders or decision-makers. Turner (2001) also identified four broad types of roles: (1) basic roles, (2) position or status roles, (3) functional group roles, and (4) value roles. Basic roles refer to roles that are associated with gender, age and social class (Banton, 1965 as cited in Turner, 2001). These are considered basic roles because they apply to a wide range of situations and because they tend to alter the meaning and taking up of other types of roles. You read "Role Theory" in category "Papers" The second type of roles, position or status roles, correspond to positions in organizations or formally organized groups (Turner, 2001). Occupational and family roles may be regarded as examples of position or status roles. Functional group roles are the informal behavior patterns that arise spontaneously as persons take on situational identities during social interactions (Benne Sheats, 1948 as cited in Turner, 2001). Examples of functional group roles are mediator, coordinator, critic, counselor, leader and follower. Finally, value roles are similar to functional group roles in that both types of roles emerge spontaneously from the social interaction. However, value roles tend to be attached to very positively or negatively valued identities (Turner, 2001). In intimate relationships, examples of value roles can be the roles of hero, villain, saint, sinner, perpetrator or victim. After providing an overview of role theory and the concept of roles, we now turn to explain the two major approaches to understanding role theory. Two Main Approaches to Understanding Roles A review of the related literature identified two main approaches to understanding roles: (1) the traditional structural-functional approach and (2) the interactionist approach. In this section, we highlight the characteristics of each approach as well as provide an explanation of the major assumptions within each perspective. We also provide illustrations as to how each approach can help enlighten our understanding of intimate partner relationships. Finally, we discuss the limitations of each approach. Traditional Structural-Functional Approach The structural-functionalist tradition of role theory focuses on how roles, as fixed components of complex social structures, cultures or social systems, influence the behavior of people (Lynch, 2007). Two related strands of role theory are embedded within this approach – structural role theory and functional role theory. Structural role theory concentrates on social structures, which are understood as stable organizations of sets of persons (called â€Å"social positions† or â€Å"statuses†) who share the same patterned and characteristics behaviors (roles) that are in relation to others sets of persons in the structure (Biddle, 1986). This particular strand of traditional role theory refers to parts of organized groups as â€Å"status† and to the fixed behaviors expected of persons occupying a status as â€Å"roles† Stryker, 2001). Thus, roles may be conceptualized as the dynamic aspect of statuses or social positions, with roles corresponding to rights and duties attached to statuses or social positions (Stryker, 2001). Within this strand, roles are understood as existing prior to the social interaction of people who occupy the statuses or soci al positions, as roles originate from the accumulated experiences of past individuals who have previously occupied a status or social position (Stryker, 2001). The second strand of traditional role theory – functionalist role theory – highlights the characteristic behaviors of persons who occupy social positions within a stable social system (Biddle, 1986). Within this strand, roles are conceptualized as the shared and normative expectations that prescribe and explain these characteristic behaviors (Biddle, 1986). Functional role theorists view the enactment of roles as something that is learned through an understanding of social norms in a society as well as something that accomplishes certain functions in social systems (Biddle, 1986). Both structural and functional strands of the traditional approach to role theory emphasize social structures as antedating roles, such that roles are seen as imposed on the individual (Turner, 2001). Thus, within this approach, the roles of perpetrator and victim can be understood as emanating from social structures such as gender. For instance, the masculine role has often been identified with being the dominant partner, the primary breadwinner, the decision-maker and the enforcer of rules in the household. On the other hand, the feminine role has often been linked with being the subordinate partner, the caretaker of the home and the supporter of the husband and children. Such role configurations may put partner occupying the masculine role at an advantage while setting the partner playing the feminine role at a disadvantage, thus making them vulnerable to becoming perpetrators and victims of intimate violence (Mihalic Elliot, 1997). Furthermore, this approach also points to socialization as the process by which persons learn to take on and perform particular roles in society (Stryker, 2002). Thus, when persons in social relationships conform to the expectations that are attached to statuses and supported by social norms, they tend to gain approval from other people who occupy related statuses and adhere to similar norms; such approval then reinforces the learning and enactment of roles (Stryker, 2002). Research has shown that typical school practices tend to create children’s identities as boy and girls (Martin, 1998 as cited in Fox Murry, 2000). In particular, findings showed that teachers tend to treat boys’ voices as different from girls’ voices, such that the former were allowed to be louder and more as compared to the latter. Presumably, such gender role socialization contributes to the accrual of privileges to the masculine role and the corresponding accrual of disadvantages to the feminine role. In addition, both strands of the traditional structural-functional approach to role theory agree on the assumption that society, social systems and social structures shape individual behaviors (Brookes, Davidson, Daly Halcomb, 2007). Analysis within this approach also starts from an examination of the social structure (Biddle, 1986). As such, within this approach, an examination of intimate partner violence will proceed from an investigation of the social systems and social structures that influence violent behaviors between partners in an intimate relationship. Furthermore, such an analysis will look into the cultural norms and values that sustain the social systems and social structures implicated in the phenomenon of intimate partner violence. However, several limitations of this approach have been raised in the related literature. According to Lynch (2007), this approach paints roles as relatively inflexible structures that are difficult to combine. Furthermore, by focusing on social structures, the traditional approach to role theory fails to take into account the mental, experiential dimension of role enactment (Lynch, 2007), thus regarding persons as automatons who take on roles mechanically. As such, this approach tends to be limited in its view of intimate partner violence as mechanically carried out by individual persons according to their status or position in the social structure, without taking into account the variability and diversity of experiences related to this phenomenon. Also, as it has difficulty accounting for individual level negotiations where actors may switch or combine roles, this approach also treats the variability and flexibility of roles as problematic (Lynch, 2007). Thus, traditional role theory is unable to address issues elated with non-conformity, social change and social systems that are not well-formed (Biddle, 1986). For instance, given instances of intimate partner violence where both partners inflict violence upon one another, traditional role theory proves to be limited in its explanation of intimate violence as emanating from the social structure. Within this approach, role changes such as when the perpetrator becomes the victim and the victim becomes the perpetrator become problematic and difficult to explain. The traditional structural-functional approach to role theory has also been criticized as advancing a one-sided view of society, with its emphasis on consensus, cooperation and continuity in social life along with its seeming blindness to disagreement, conflict and change (Stryker, 2001). Finally, scholars have also criticized the traditional approach to role theory as rationalizing and reinforcing the existing social order (Stryker, 2001). Interactionist Approach The interactionist approach to role theory arose from the symbolic interactionism perspective in sociology and as such gives importance to the roles of individual actors, the development of roles through social interaction, and the processes through which social actors understand and interpret their own and other people’s behavior (Biddle, 1986). Thus, this approach focuses on how roles emerge in social interactions and how individuals are able to influence behavioral expectations through social negotiation (Lynch, 2007). Within this approach, a role is conceptualized as neither fixed nor prescribed, but rather, something that is continuously negotiated by persons in social interaction (Mead, 1934 as cited in Lynch, 2007; Blumer, 1969 as cited in Lynch, 2007). Using this approach to understand intimate partner violence therefore necessitates looking at how partners in a violent relationship interact with one another as well as how they, negotiate, take on, impose or reject specific roles. In contrast to the traditional approach to role theory which highlights social systems and social structures, the interactionist approach emphasizes social processes such as communication, interpretation and negotiation (Lynch, 2007). Theorizing within this approach assumes that the relationship between personal, behavioral and social variables is reciprocal (Plummer, 1991 as cited in Lynch, 2007). As such, the interactionist role theory approach to xamining intimate partner violence will tend to focus on how partners communicate, interpret and negotiate particular issues in their relationship. As opposed to the traditional approach to role theory that posits the unidirectional influence of social structure on individual action, the interactionist approach opens up the possibility that personal and behavioral variables may influence social structural variables. For interactionist theorists, social actors interpret and enact their own roles by imagining the roles of others actors in t he social interaction (Turner, 2001). Thus, far from being automatons who take on roles mechanically, people are viewed as interpreting, negotiating and shaping their own roles to be able to interact effectively with other people who take on related roles (Turner, 2001). In this approach, analysis starts from an examination of the patterns of social interactions among individuals and groups of individuals (Turner, 2001). As such, research on intimate partner violence using this approach will look at the interpretative, negotiated and dynamic nature of violent interactions between partners. Some challenges to the interactionist approach to role theory have also been raised. One of these challenges criticized the interactionist approach for failing to take into account the influence of social institutions and structural forces on the role enactment process (Lynch, 2007). Thus, little attention is given to the structural constraints that impinge on roles (Biddle, 1986). To illustrate, although intimate partner violence can be analyzed by studying the social interactions where violence occurs, it is also important to trace the occurrence of intimate violence to social structures that impose and influence the roles that people enact. In addition, as the interactionist approach tends to focus on specific instances of social interactions, interactionist theorists sometimes fail to discuss the contextual limits of their assumptions (Biddle, 1986). Also, while the approach acknowledges the reciprocal relationship between personal, behavioral and social variables, it still fails to explain how these relationships feedback and affect succeeding role enactments (Lynch, 2007). Summary of Limitations of Two Main Approaches to Role Theory In his work on proposing an integration between role theory and positioning theory, Henriksen (2008) cited important limitations of the two main approaches to role theory. These limitations represent a summary of the difficulties that are encountered when using the traditional structural-functional approach and the interactionist approach to understanding social phenomena such as intimate partner violence. On the one hand, the traditional structural-functional approach seems to ignore individual action and its influence on social structure (Henriksen, 2008). Furthermore, a structural-functional approach to role theory also appears to be limited in examining the finer grains of social interaction (Harre van Langenhove, 1999 as cited in Henriksen, 2008; Harre Moghaddam, 2003 as cited in Henriksen, 2008). On the other hand, the interactionist approach appears to focus on social interactions, without taking into account the influence of social structures on the patterning and stability of such interactions. The interactionist approach has also been criticized for its limited attention to the social span of social interaction (Henriksen, 2008). It is based on these limitations of role theory that we propose an integration of role theory with positioning theory, in view of providing a better understanding of intimate partner violence at the structural, interactional and discursive levels. References Biddle, B. J. (1986). Recent developments in role theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 12, 67-92. Brookes, K. , Davidson, P. M. , Daly, J. , Halcomb, E. J. (2007). Role theory: A framework to investigate the community nurse role in contemporary health care systems. Contemporary Nurse: A Journal for the Australian Nursing Profession, 25 (1-2), 146-155. Callero, P. L. (1994). From role-playing to role-using: Understanding role as resource. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57 (3), 228-243. Ellington, J. E. Marshall, L. L. (1997). Gender role perceptions of women in abusive relationships. Sex Roles, 36 (5/6), 349-369. Fox, G. L. Murry, V. M. (2000). Gender and families: Feminist perspectives and family research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 1160-1172. Henriksen, T. D. (2008). Liquidating roles and crystallizing positioning: Investigating the road between positioning theory and role theory. In F. Moghaddam, R. Harre, and N. Lee (Eds. ), Global conflict resolution through positioning analysis (pp. 41-64). New York: Springer. Lynch, K. D. (2007). Modeling role enactment: Linking role theory and social cognition. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 37 (4), 379-399. Mangus, A. R. (1957). Role theory and marriage counseling. Social Forces, 35 (3), 200-209. Mihalic, S. W. Elliot, D. (1997). A social learning theory model of violence. Journal of Family Violence, 12 (1), 21-47. Stryker, S. (2001). Traditional symbolic interactionism, role theory and structural symbolic interactionism: The Road to Identity Theory. In J. H. Turner (ed. ), Handbook of Sociological Theory (pp. 211-230). Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York. Thomas, E. J. Biddle, B. J. (1966). Basic concepts for the variables of role phenomena. In B. J. Biddle E. J. Thomas (Eds. ), Role theory: concepts and research (pp. 51-65). New York: John Wiley Sons. Turner, R. H. (2001). Role theory. In J. H. Turner (ed. ), Handbook of Sociological Theory (pp. 233-254). Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York. How to cite Role Theory, Papers

Made of Semiconductors

Question: Discuss about the Made of Semiconductors ? Answer : Introduction Normal processors can generally perform operations on operands more efficiently as compared to main memories located within computers. However, this outcome does not mean that large capacity memories cannot perform operations in similar fashions as processors. In fact, memories (made of semiconductors) can perform at high speeds compared to normal processors, however, the cost implications for their performance is much too high hence the choice of processors. Moreover, for operand operations, main memories must be fitted with semiconductor components that work at high speeds which again increases the cost even further. Therefore, to bridge the gap between high-speed processors and main memories, a memory block(s) known as cache are fitted between the processors and the main memories (UMD, 2001). Cache memory is, therefore, a high-speed memory that bridges the gap developed between the variations in processor and main memory speeds. Furthermore, the same facility is used to store addresses that are frequently used by the main memory. In general, the overall idea behind cache memory is similar to that of virtual memories where some portions of the main memory (which acts at low speeds) are stored within a high-speed location (cache) in duplicate format. This outcome leads to an efficient system that will always pass memory requests to the cache memory before escalating them to the main memory (UMD, 2001). Consider an example where an application request a certain arithmetic operation, this request is first passed to the cache memory if the necessary operands and addresses are available the cache executes this operation. However, if it fails to respond, the operation is forwarded to the main memory (Dandamudi, 2003). Nevertheless, cache memories should never be confused with virtual memories as they have high speeds requirements as compared to virtual memories. However, they both depend on the correlation of address references which means their differences stem from implementation procedures. Cache Memorys Major Components Memory Components Cache memory avails frequently used data to the processors, this functionality is achieved through its building blocks that develop small memory sections known as the primary cache (Level 1 cache). Primary cache is built within the processor such as the central processing unit (CPU) having a small memory size typically within the range of 2 kilobytes to 64 kilobytes. In addition to the primary cache, the secondary cache (Level 2 cache) is then developed within a memory location located in close proximities to the CPU. On most occasions, the level 2 cache is hosted within a memory card but will have a direct connection to the processor. Furthermore, the use of level 2 cache is normally regulated by the L2 controller a specific circuit found on the motherboard of a computer. Moreover, its size (level 2 cache) will range between 256 KB to 2MB depending on the processor's size (Nicolast, 2011). In addition to these levels is the Level 3 cache that is typically used to improve the overall performance of level 1 and level 2 caches. In general, level 3 caches are specialised memory locations that are significantly slower to level 1 and 2 caches. However, as compared to other memory locations they are significantly faster, for instance, they are known to have double the speeds of random access memory (RAM). Moreover, most modern multi-processor computers will have L1 and L2 caches within each processor core but will have a common L3 cache shared amongst the processors. Furthermore, because its meant to improve operations, any instruction directed to it is automatically elevated to a higher tier i.e. L1 or L2 cache (Rouse, 2017). Fig: Three level cache configuration Specialised Cache Although level 3 cache can be defined as a specialised cache, other caches that perform other operations other than data and instruction cache exist and hold this name. TLB (Translation look side buffer) for instance records both virtual and physical addresses allowing for translation to take place. Moreover, other caches like the disk cache leverage on the functionalities of the RAM and flash memory to offer same services as data caching but at different locations. Cache organisation and Configurations Several methods can be used to store data within the cache memory, these methods govern the internal structure of the memory locations. Moreover, the processor uses these structures to reference the address of the main memory location of the data it wants to access. Therefore, a proper organisation is needed to find the appropriate location, a concept known as mapping. This concept must be implemented in the hardware components to facilitate improvements in the operating system. Three methods are commonly used: Direct mapping Similar to a table having many rows but with three columns, direct mapping assigns each block of data to a specific cache location. Fully associative mapping Unlike direct mapping where a block mapping is based on pre-defined cache locations, this method allows a block of data to be mapped to any given cache location. Set Associative mapping Commonly seen as a compromise between the previous two, this method allows a block to be mapped in a subset of cache locations. Discussion Cache Performance To outline a caches performance, several terms must be defined as their operations determine the functionality of the said system. One, we have the cache hit which is the actual data found in the cache itself. Secondly, we have cache miss which is any data other than that found in the cache memory. Moreover, when a processor loads any data from a given memory into the cache, a delay is exhibited i.e. the miss penalty. Now, a general approach to quantifying a caches performance is to calculate its access time, where this value is given as: Access time = Hit cost + Miss rate*Miss penalty Furthermore, since the initial definition of cache memory saw it as a component that bridges the speed between fast and slow memory locations, this estimation can translate into: Access time = Fast memory access time + miss rate*slow memory access time (UMD, 2001). During the design of cache memory a lot of emphases is placed on fast control as well as reducing the size of miss rate, this because the speed of the main memory is always expected to improve with time (i.e. with time and more operations the speed increases). Moreover, the miss rate, an important component of cache design can be classified into three major categories; conflict miss, capacity miss and compulsory miss. Compulsory misses are a mandatory requirement of cache memory as they occur when a new program/data is loaded into the cache for the first time. Capacity misses, on the other hand, occur when the size of the cache is less as compared to the size of the data regardless of the organisation or mapping used. Finally, conflict misses usually occur when the hashing functions (operation mechanisms) operate at a fast rate missing some data. From this definition, it pretty obvious to note the misses that can be easily eradicated thus improving the systems performance i.e. confli ct misses. This objective is achieved using proper hashing functions that match the system design catering for both the fast and slow memory locations (Silvano, 2014). Application of cache memory to achieve its overall goal In general, the overall objective of the cache memory is to improve a computers performance and having established how its performance is gauged its important to highlight how it actually achieves its goal. For a cache memory to improve a computers performance, it has two general objectives: To provide the user with an illusion of using a very large memory that is simultaneously very fast. Remember, a user will use a 1 terabyte hard disk at a very high speed, however, the actual memory location does not achieve these speeds on its own. To meet the first objective, it provides data to the processors at very high speeds which facilitate a faster frequency of operations. Now, these objectives are again achieved using the principle of locality of references where the cache continuously refers to used memory locations or data. Two variations of the principle exist; temporary locality where data and even instructions are used in loops if the reference to the memory element exists. Secondly, the spatial locality where a close address is used to refer to the actual memory location or element (Silvano, 2014). Future trends In the past several cache memory variations have existed, for instance in some inexpensive computers, the level 3 cache is eliminated and incorporated into other systems. However recent trends have seen a new solution being adopted, a solution that is set to be the future of cache memories. In essence, all the three levels of cache memory are being implemented in the processors which improve the performance. Therefore, in the future users will stop choosing computers based on the motherboard and bus architecture and instead focus on processors having the right cache integration (Rouse, 2017). Conclusion Cache memory is an integral part of a computer and without it, the speed gaps between the processors would be so high which would translate into poor performance. A processor is very fast, transferring and loading data at high speeds, however, the main memory is slow at meeting the same functions but an upside to it is that it has a large memory capacity. The cache acts as a liaison between the two enabling the end user to capitalise on the functionalities and benefits of the two components. References Dandamudi. S. (2003). Fundamentals of computer organization and design. Springer. Retrieved 28 March, 2017, from: https://service.scs.carleton.ca/sivarama/org_book/org_book_web/slides/chap_1_versions/ch17_1.pdf Nicolast. (2011). Main memory. Introduction to computer science course. Retrieved 28 March, 2017, from: https://www2.cs.ucy.ac.cy/~nicolast/courses/lectures/MainMemory.pdf Rouse. M. (2017). Cache memory. Tech target. Retrieved 28 March, 2017, from: https://searchstorage.techtarget.com/definition/cache-memory Silvano. C. (2014). Introduction to cache memories. Advanced computer architecture. Retrieved 28 March, 2017, from: https://home.deib.polimi.it/silvano/FilePDF/ARC-MULTIMEDIA/Lesson_8A_New_Cache_ENGLISH_V4_COMO.pdf UMD. (2011). Introduction to cache memory. Retrieved 28 March, 2017, from: https://www.cs.umd.edu/class/fall2001/cmsc411/proj01/cache/cache.pdf

The Hunter Trials Essay Example

The Hunter Trials Paper Hunter Trials is a humorous poem written by renowned author John Betjemen. The poem captures the thoughts and feelings of a young girl who is competing in a gymkhana. The overall structure and vocabulary of the poem is uncomplicated and therefore adds interest and comedy to the text. The poem contains eight verses, each of which contain four lines. There is an apparent rhyming scheme of lines two and four, and one and three. The poem is in first person and allows the writer to portray his ideas more clearly. During the poem, John Betjemen stereotypes posh people and reflects on their accents and way of speech such as: Do, lend her some bits, Mummy, do. This therefore ties in with the subject and makes the poem humorous. The writer also includes several bizarre and unusual names such as Geyser and Blewitt These names are positioned at the end of the lines and makes the poem more humorous. As well as that, the last verse finishes off the poem well. The sentence: And my silly old collar bones bust Represents the spoiled child that John tried to capture throughout this poem. Yet the main factor that contributes to the comedy of the poem is the sequence of the events. For instance, the idea of fishing down the horses throat with a spanner is in itself amusing. Overall, the poem uses several techniques and use of words to portray the bright and amusing side of a gymkhana. We will write a custom essay sample on The Hunter Trials specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on The Hunter Trials specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on The Hunter Trials specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer

Death penalty misc14 essays

Death penalty misc14 essays December 12, 1984, the first jolt failed to kill Alpha Otis Stephens, he struggled for eight minutes before a second jolt finished the job. The first jolt took two minutes, and then there was a six-minute pause. During this six-minute pause body could cool before physicians could examine him and declare that another jolt was needed. Stephens took 23 breaths, during that six-minute interval. Such incidents prove that the death penalty constitutes cruel and unusual punishment and should be replaced by life in prison. The following reasons prove that the death penalty harms rather than helps any quest for a just, humane society. The Bible requires the death penalty for a wide variety of crimes, including sex before marriage, adultery, and homosexual behavior, doing work on Saturday and murder.Somehow people became more tolerant; they eliminated the death penalty for several sins. Sins such as the following: People might as well eliminate the death penalty for murder as well. In fact, according to the Bible an individual who dies without being "saved" (during an execution) will go to Hell for eternal punishment. By killing the person, we are eliminating some individuals' chance for salvation. Human life has intrinsic value, even if a person has murdered another. Nobody should ever be killed, even by the state. Moreover, human beings such as the poor, males, and racial minorities are over-represented among those executed. A study of over 2 dozen convicted criminals on death row found that all had been so seriously abused during childhood that they probably all suffered from brain damage. To further this subject, women convicted of murder are almost never executed. For instance, in March 1998 Judy Beenano aged 54 in Florida, was called the "Black Widow" for poisoning her husband, drowning her son and trying to blow up her fianc ...

What Is a Republic vs a Democracy Understanding the Difference

What Is a Republic vs a Democracy Understanding the Difference SAT / ACT Prep Online Guides and Tips If you look closely at the United States Pledge of Allegiance, you’ll see that it calls the United States a republic. It reads: "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.† So what does that mean, exactly? Can the United States be both a democracy and a republic? And what is the difference between a democracy and republic, anyway? As it turns out, there are subtle, but important, differences between a democracy and a republic, and that the definitions aren’t mutually exclusive. In other words, it’s complicated. But don’t worry! Knowing the differences between a republic vs a democracy is important for tons of AP exams, including both history tests (U.S. and world) and both government and politics tests (U.S. and comparative). That’s why we’ve put this guide together for you. By the end of this article, you’ll know the definitions of a democracy and a republic, how they operate, the differences between them, and where the United States fits into the discussion. So let’s get started! What Is a Democracy? The term â€Å"democracy† comes from the combination of two Greek words: â€Å"demos,† meaning â€Å"the people,† and â€Å"kratia,† which means â€Å"power or authority.† Thus, a democracy refers to a type of government where the power to govern rests with a country’s people rather than a ruling family (a monarchy) or a single individual (totalitarianism). That means that citizens control how their government operates, usually through voting. The Origins of Democracy The term â€Å"democracy† first pops up in the 5th century BCE to refer to the government in Athens, Greece. Between 508 BCE and 322 BCE, Athenians governed themselves in what is now referred to as a pure democracy. (Don’t worry...we’ll go into that a little later.) Ancient Athenians didn’t have anyone to represent them in government; instead, everyone had a voice- literally. Debates on topics of governance were held publicly in what was referred to as The Athenian Assembly, and every male Athenian citizen had individual voting rights. Not only that, but qualified citizens were given time off of work and a stipend to help make sure every voice was heard! Through the Assembly, every voice could weigh in on every issue, and all laws and rules of governance were established based on majority rule. While this type of democracy would eventually be replaced by a more representative form of government, the underlying idea- that government works best when it's run by its citizens- would go on to influence the governance of most of the Western world, including the United States. The 3 Major Types of Democracies With growing populations and more complex systems of government, the Athenian method of one voice, one vote doesn’t always work. So as the world has changed, democracy has changed with it. Here are the three major types of democracies seen in the world today. Direct Democracy Also known as pure democracy, direct democracy is democracy in its most basic form. Just like the Athenians at the Assembly, direct democracy lets each qualified individual shape policy by casting a direct vote. In other words, citizens are directly involved in the political process! In this system, political decisions are made based on what the majority of voters decide. Each qualified person casts a vote, and the category with the most number of votes wins. The benefits to a direct democracy are that it lets each person, regardless of class, race, or economic position have a voice. However, in practice, direct democracies often exclude certain groups. For instance, in ancient Athens, only male citizens had the right to participate in direct democracy. Women, criminals, and slaves- even though they were subject to Athens’ laws and policies- were denied a voice. Additionally, direct democracy doesn’t always work well on a large scale. That’s because there are an overwhelming number of decisions that need to be made to keep governments running. Examples of Direct Democracy in Action Because direct democracy can be unwieldy on the national level, there are few countries that use it as a primary governmental system. But that doesn’t mean direct democracy doesn’t exist anymore! Here are some examples of where you can see direct democracy in action. Switzerland: Switzerland, a country of roughly 8.2 million people, uses direct democracy to run its local, regional, and federal governments. Every citizen over the age of 18 weighs in on how the country should be run, and because votes are so important, they are held four times a year and scheduled decades in advance. Also, as a direct democracy Switzerland lacks an elected Head of State. Instead, the country has a Federal Council which is elected by the Federal Assembly (which works like the Athenian Assembly) every four years. Each year, a new person from the Federal Council is elected to serve as president! Local Elections in the U.S.: Because the populations are much smaller, local, municipal, and county elections often rely on direct democracy to make sure government is serving the will of the people. Local laws and referendums are often put up for a majority vote where every vote counts. State Elections in the U.S.: Fourteen states allow citizens to design legislation and put it up for a vote through what are called ballot initiatives. Each state lets an individual citizen create a ballot initiative, and if it gets enough signatures via petition, it gets put on a statewide ballot where it passes by majority vote. The catch? In order to go on the ballot, each initiative must be ruled constitutional by the state courts, too! Representative Democracy The second type of democracy is a representative democracy (sometimes called indirect democracy). In this system of government, certain individuals are elected to represent the will of the people. These people, often referred to as elected officials, are chosen to vote on behalf of a specific group of citizens. These groups can be defined in many ways. Sometimes people are grouped by neighborhood, by city, by county, or even by province or state. The idea behind a representative democracy is to streamline the process of government. Because elections where everyone weighs in are logistically difficult, having a small number of people representing the desires of the majority allow for much faster decision making. This is especially important when governments are representing a large number of people, and it’s one of the reasons why many federal governments use indirect democracy to operate. But representative democracy comes with drawbacks, too. One of the biggest problems is that in most cases, representatives aren’t required (by law, constitution, etc.) to actually represent the will of their constituents. They’re able to make their own decisions, which can mean that elected officials are more prone to corruption. Additionally, there’s the problem of the vocal minority. Have you ever heard the term, â€Å"the squeaky wheel gets the grease†? It just means that the people who complain the loudest are often the ones who get the most attention. So sometimes a few people who complain loudly are mistaken for representing the majority of their community. Examples of Representational Democracy in Action Because representational democracy works best on a larger scale, most Western governments operate this way (if the country is democratic, of course). Here are a few examples of representational democracy in action. The U.S. Legislature: The U.S. Legislature is a federal representational government, meaning that the representatives who serve create laws that apply to the entirety of the United States. The legislative branch is split into two houses: the Senate and the House of Representatives. In the Senate, each state elects two people to represent their interests on the national level. In the House of Representatives, the number of representatives from each state is determined by population, so bigger states have more representatives. In both cases, all the representatives are elected by majority vote in their respective states. (Note: this is different than other representative democracies, like the United Kingdom parliament, where one house is elected and the other house is appointed by the Prime Minister or President.) U.S. State Legislatures: U.S. state legislatures work exactly like the federal legislature, only on a smaller scale. Each state has both a senate and a house of representatives, and the state’s residents elect representatives based on the districts they live in. This allows each state’s residents to have a say in how their state is governed. The Canadian Government: Like the United States, Canada holds popular elections where a handful of representatives are chosen to represent the citizenry at both the provincial and the national level. The elected officials serve in The House of Commons, which is similar to Congress in the United States. Each of Canada’s 10 provinces are also representative democracies where elected officials represent the will of their province’s citizens. Constitutional Democracy A constitutional democracy is the third major type of democracy in operation today. Constitutional democracies are characterized by having structures in place that limit the power of the majority. Put another way, constitutional democracies have constitutions or other governing documents that help regulate the power of those elected to office. To do this, constitutional democracies function based on a combination of democratic principles and the rule of law. The nation’s constitution serves as the highest form of law and outlines people’s rights as well as what the government can and can’t do. (You might say that the constitution puts limits on the government’s power in order to protect citizens freedom.) As a result, a constitutional democracy government must both uphold the constitution and still represent the will of its people. The benefit of a constitutional democracy is that it gives a country a set of principles to use as a guide for all other decisions. It also protects the citizens by guaranteeing them a certain set of rights. (For the United States, that’s â€Å"Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.†) However, a constitutional democracy also limits an individual citizen’s ability to participate in government since there are strict legal parameters around what people can and can’t do. Additionally, constitutions are very hard to change. In the United States, it takes a two-thirds majority vote in Congress or a constitutional convention (or joint meeting) called for by two-thirds of the states’ governments in order to amend the Constitution! That can be a big problem, especially when aspects of the Constitution are out of date. (Check out the 13th Amendment, which prohibits slavery, or the 19th Amendment, which gives women the right to vote, to see this in action.) Examples of Constitutional Democracy in Action Constitutional democracies are a popular form of democracy around the world. We’ll talk about a few countries that use constitutional democracy below, but if you’re interested in a full list, you can find that here. The United States: Of course, the United States relies on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to create all new legislation. It’s the job of the judicial branch- including the Supreme Court- to determine whether new laws violate the Constitution or Americans’ constitutional rights. In fact, did you know can go to school to study constitutional law? You can! Check out the Constitutional Law Reporter to learn more about how constitutional law is practiced in America today. Germany: After World War II, Germany was split into essentially two different countries, East Germany and West Germany. When West Germany was set up by the Allies, it was formed as a constitutional democracy. It wasn’t until the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1991 that Germany was unified under a single constitution. Mexico: The United States’ southern neighbor is also a constitutional democracy. The Constitution of Mexico, which was ratified in 1917, was the first constitution in the world to create guidelines for social rights for its citizens, like a right to an education. (Remember: the United States initially did this through the Bill of Rights, which are the first ten amendments to the Constitution.) But Wait...Can a Country Be More Than One Type of Democracy? As you were reading through this section, you probably realized that the United States, along with many other countries, fall into more than one democratic category. That’s because a democratic country can use more than one type of democracy to run its government. For instance, a city can use direct democracy to vote in new laws and select state and federal representatives. Those representatives then participate in representative democracy, where they speak- and vote!- on behalf of their constituents. And finally, all of these actions- policy decisions, government structure, citizens’ rights, and the creation of new laws- are governed by the constitution. That means the United States is a constitutional democracy as well. This is possible because all democracies, regardless of their organizational structure, operate on a shared set of principles. Let’s take a closer look at those now. Voting is a key component of democracy Characteristics of Democracies Beyond just structure, democracies are also characterized by a shared ideology, or system of beliefs. According to Larry Diamond, a professor at Stanford and one of the foremost scholars in democracy studies, democracies have four foundational characteristics. We’ll talk about each principle in more depth below. #1: Free and Fair Elections In order to make sure that people’s voices are being heard accurately, democracies have to ensure that all voting processes are â€Å"free and fair.† But what does that mean? In order for an election to be â€Å"free and fair,† it has to be administered in a way that allows its citizens to vote and treats all political parties and candidates equally. That means the process 1) needs to be accessible to everyone who meets voting qualifications and 2) as unbiased as possible. Furthermore, in order to be as fair, these elections need to occur at a regular interval. If elections are only happening every two decades, that denies people the ability to make their voices heard! Free and fair elections are important to democracy because the voting process is the way that citizens voice their opinions and, in representative forms of government, choose the people who will represent them in higher levels of government. It also puts an important check on power. If representatives are coming up for reelection regularly, it puts pressure on them to vote in line with their constituents. Otherwise they could lose their position during the next voting cycle. #2: Citizen Participation In order for democracy to function, its citizens have to participate in the process of government. That means people have to run for office, create ballot initiatives, petition for laws and causes they believe in, and vote. Remember that the term â€Å"democracy† means that the power to rule belongs to the people. Only by exercising that power can a nation’s citizens ensure that their will is reflected in the country’s laws and structures. It’s also important that in a democracy, all citizens are given an equal right to participate regardless of where they live, what they do for work, or what culture they come from. If civic participation is limited to a certain class or race, the system becomes an oligarchy instead. (In oligarchies, a small group of unelected people hold all the governing power.) When everyone has a chance to participate, it ensures that the government accurately reflects the populace, that minority populations have a voice, and that new laws are fair for everyone. #3: Protection of Citizens’ Human Rights Perhaps most notably, democracies believe in freedom. Citizens should have the right to express their opinions and participate in democracy without fear or intimidation. Not only do democratic societies believe that creates a better life for its citizens, it also helps keep governmental power in check. If people can freely- but peacefully- express their opinions, it makes it clear when elected representatives aren’t listening to the will of the people. Even more importantly, democracies believe in the protection of people’s basic human rights. In the United States, these are outlined in the Bill of Rights, and they include the right to free speech, the right to bear arms, protection from the illegal seizure of property, and the right to a trial by jury. (Not familiar with the Bill of Rights? The Bill of Rights Institute breaks it down for you!) In other words, democracies guarantee fundamental protections to individual citizens which allows them to live in safety, freedom, and peace. #4: Equal Rule of Law Finally, the last thing all systems of democracy have in common is the rule of law. According to Dr. Diamond, the rule of law is fundamentally important to democracy because it protects the rights of citizens, maintains order, and limits the power of government. In other words, if elections are how citizens make their voices heard, then laws are the ways that citizens’ desires are enforced. It’s pretty clear how laws work in a constitutional or representative form of democracy. In a constitutional democracy, the constitution itself lays out some fundamental laws, and no other legislation can violate them. In a representational democracy, laws are created by the elected officials in order to make sure that their constituents’ concerns are being addressed. But what about a direct democracy where everyone has a voice? Well, even in ancient Athens, the oldest direct democracy, had laws to help govern the city-state. The whole point of The Assembly was to create new policies and laws that the majority of people could agree on, and those policies would govern the entire populace! Laws, then, are a tool people can use to make sure the ideals of democracy- like freedom and basic human rights- are maintained. Nick Youngson/Alpha Stock Images What Is a Republic? Whew! Now you know a lot about how democracies function and their core ideals. Now it’s time to look at a republic vs. a democracy. How are they different? Well, the answer is a little bit complicated. The term â€Å"republic† comes from theGreek word politeia, which means the â€Å"rights of citizens.† (It also comes from the Latin res publica, which means â€Å"public affair.†) In modern English, a republic is a government system where the power rests with a nation’s citizens. To do this, republics use elected officials to represent the will of their citizens within the government. In other words, republics rely on a representational form of government, just like the representational democracies we talked about earlier! Additionally, in order for a country to qualify as a republic, its head of state has to be an elected official. That means that while countries like France and Germany- which have elected presidents as heads of state- are republics. Countries with a monarch as the head of state, like Canada and the United Kingdom, are not. So to summarize: a republic is a form of government where the power a) rests with the people, b) is exercised through representative government, and c) has an elected head of state. The Origins of Republics While many ancient states were republics, one of the most notable was the Roman Republic that existed between 500 BCE and 27 BCE. During this time, Rome had expanded to encompass most of modern-day Europe along with parts of Asia and Africa. That meant that Rome was home to many different cultures, and its citizens spoke 21 different languages! This time period also marked Rome’s switch from a monarchy- where a king ruled the nation- to a constitutional government. In 509 BCE, the last Roman King, Lucius Tarquinius Superbus was overthrown and sent into exile. The Roman Senate, which was comprised of Rome’s noble families, decided to institute a new type of government. The country would now be led by two elected consuls who had equal power and would serve one-year terms. These consuls were elected by legislative assemblies made up of male citizens of Rome. These assemblies also voted on laws developed by the Roman Senate. The Roman Senate was comprised of Patricians, which were members of Rome’s noble class. The Senators were appointed by the Roman consuls, and they served as senators for life. The Senate’s job was to draft new laws that would be voted on by the Assembly. Over the next few centuries, the government of Rome would develop a set of guidelines and principles to govern the expanding country, which would coalesce into the Roman Constitution. The Constitution would remain one of the foundational governing documents of the Roman Empire up until its collapse in the 5th century CE. The countries in blue, orange, yellow, and green are all classified as republics. Types of Republics Today Remember that a republic is a nation where governmental power rests with its citizens, uses a representational government, and has an elected head of state. These are pretty general criteria, so that means there are quite a few republics today. In fact, as of 2017, 159 of the world’s 206 countries use the word â€Å"republic† as part of their official names! Additionally, the loose definition of a republic means there many different types of republics functioning today. We’ll briefly discuss the major types of republics here, but you can find more in-depth information about each one by following the links in each description. Constitutional Republic In a constitutional republic, the government is limited by laws established by a formal constitution, which is generally secular in nature. Additionally, the government is run by elected officials who are voted on by the population, and those officials are required to follow the rules of government laid out by that country’s constitution. (For more information about republics based on religion, see the section on â€Å"theological republics.†) Examples of modern constitutional republics include the countries like India and South Africa. Parliamentary Republic A parliamentary republic uses a parliamentary form of government in which the head of state runs the executive branch of government and the head of parliament runs the legislature. The legislature itself is comprised of elected officials that are voted into office by the country’s citizens. Examples of parliamentary republics include Greece, Hungary, and Malta. Presidential Republic A presidential republic allows its citizens to elect a president to serve as the country’s head of state. However, in a presidential republic, the president also serves as the head of the government, too! This is different from a monarchy, where the king or queen serves as the head of state while a prime minister or president runs the day-to-day operations of the government. Examples of presidential republics today include Brazil, Mexico, and Indonesia. Federal Republic Federal republics are countries that are actually a union of states, all of which operate on a republican form of government. In order to qualify as a federal republic, states have to have independence to make their own laws and decisions, as long as those laws don’t conflict with policies established for the entire country on the federal level. (In this way, states function as a mini-republic, complete with elected officials and an elected head of state, like a governor!) Examples of federal republics include the United States, Germany, and Switzerland. Theocratic Republic These types of republics are governed primarily by religious law. In this case, religious texts become the backbone of the nation’s governing structure and are often drafted into a religious governing constitution. That means that additional laws and policies developed by the government must also be in line with religious law. Additionally, in order to qualify as a republic, these theocracies must have an elected head of state rather than a monarchy. Examples of modern theocratic republics include Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Can a Country Be More Than One Type of Republic? Just like a country can be more than one type of democracy, a country can also be more than one type of republic! For example, Iran has a parliament- making it a parliamentary republic- but it also bases its governing structure on religious law, making it a theocratic republic. The same is true for a country like Germany, which operates on the principles of both a parliamentary republic and a federal republic. In other words, much like democracies, the types of republics we discussed above are not mutually exclusive. In fact, in order for a government to run efficiently, it must often combine governing structures. Russia is a republic but is notdemocratic Republic Vs. Democracy: What’s the Difference? You’ve probably already noticed that republics and democracies have a lot in common, namely that they both are systems where the power to govern rests with the people. So what’s the difference in a republic vs. a democracy? The major difference between a democracy and a republic is that a republic is a form of government whereas a democracy is an ideology that helps shape how a government is run. Put another way: a republic is the system of government that allows a country to be democratic! So while people tend to use the terms â€Å"democracy† and â€Å"republic† interchangeably, they aren’t exactly the same thing. The best way to understand this difference is to look at examples where a republic style of government isn’t democratic. To do this, let’s talk about two non-democratic republics: Russia and North Korea. Russia The Russian government, like many other nations, is set up like a republic. According to the Russian Constitution, the Russian president- which is elected by the Russian populace- is the head of state and runs the executive branch of government. It’s the president’s job to appoint a prime minister, whose job it is to run the government on a day-to-day basis. But in reality, Russia has operated more like a dictatorship than a democracy under current President Vladimir Putin. Although the president and other government officials are elected by popular vote, the Russian government also limits Russian citizens’ freedom, including suppressing free speech and controlling access to objective information. North Korea North Korea’s government is set up much like the United States’ and is split into three branches: the executive branch, the judicial branch, and the legislative branch. By law, the citizens in North Korea elect officials to the legislative branch through popular vote, and the legislative branch passes laws on behalf of the people. (That’s why North Korea’s full name is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.) In actuality, North Korea is classified as a dictatorship. The current president, Kim Jong-Un, inherited his position from his father. Additionally, elections in North Korea are largely for show- only one candidate runs for each position, so people really have no choice in their representation. Beyond that, the government severely limits people’s ability to travel, so much so that many North Koreans have to pay people to smuggle them out of the country. So despite having a republican government structure- and having the term â€Å"democratic† in their country’s name- North Korea doesn’t function like a democracy on a day-to-day basis. The United States: A Democratic Republic So that leaves us with one final question: what type of government is the United States? Where does the U.S. fall in the republic vs. democracy debate? The answer is that the United States is both a democracy and a republic! The U.S. as a Republic When the founding fathers were writing the U.S. Constitution, they envisioned the United States as a republic. Alexander Hamilton and James Madison made this clear in The Federalist Papers, where they make it clear that the federal government will be made up of elected officials who represent the will of the people. In fact, many of the United States’ founders believed that a direct democracy would result in nothing more than â€Å"...instability, injustice, and confusion.† As a result, the U.S. Constitution outlines a system of government that allows people to fairly vote on representatives, and those representatives make laws in accordance to the people’s will. Each of the states’ governments are set up in the same way, which means that the states are mini-republics, too! Additionally, in order to be a republic, people must elect the person who will serve as the head of state. This is certainly true in the U.S., where citizens vote on who will serve as president of the country every four years (though whether this is a direct or indirect vote is a subject of debate thanks to the electoral college). Considering all of this, the United States works as a combination of a constitutional, presidential, and federal republic! The U.S as a Democracy Remember that the difference between a republic and a democracy comes in how each of those ideas functions in government. So if the United States is a republic because of how the government operates, it’s a democracy because of why it operates. In other words, the U.S. runs its government like a republic, but it bases its government on democratic ideals. In order to operate as a democracy, the United States has to have free and fair elections, citizen participation in government, protect citizens’ human rights, and honor the rule of law. The United States meets all four the criteria to qualify as a democracy. In terms of elections, the U.S. holds regular elections for its elected officials at regular intervals, and any qualified U.S. citizen is allowed to cast their vote for their representatives. Additionally, these representatives are other U.S. citizens. Roles in government aren’t passed down from family to family- all citizens in good standing are welcome to run for office regardless of class, gender, or culture. But what about guaranteeing human rights? One look at the Bill of Rights makes this clear. Not only do the amendments to the U.S. Constitution make guarantees about equality and freedom, they also serve as a set of protections for all U.S. citizens from the overreach of government power. And finally, the U.S Constitution serves as the country’s guiding legal document. All other laws must first uphold the laws and rights outlined in the Constitution first! So Now What? Are you reading this post in preparation for the U.S. History AP Exam? If so, you should also check out some of our other resources! We have subject-specific posts like our NATO overview (coming soon!) and a complete guide to AP U.S. History books. If you’re a freshman, sophomore, or junior, you might consider adding a few more AP classes to your schedule. Here’s a complete list of AP courses and tests to help you choose classes that are perfect for you. Are you also considering taking the SAT subject tests in addition to- or instead of!- an AP exam? Make sure you get the inside information on both before you make your decision.

Writing a paper about a "TED TALK" Essay

Writing a paper about a "TED TALK" - Essay Example Professor Amy Cuddy said that some power poses don’t only change the way people are perceived by others but also change their body’s chemistry immediately. Body language judgments will predict life outcomes that are meaningful like who people are, who they will promote or hire and how they will ask out for a date. This research will focus on how body language shapes who people are. Amy Cuddy argues that nonverbal expressions of dominance and power in the animal kingdom is about stretching out, expanding, and making you big. It is not limited to primates alone but also to animals which also do this whenever they feel chronically powerful and also the moment they feel powerful. Both people, born blind or with sight expand their bodies and throw hands in the air after winning in competitions. When people feel powerless, they wrap themselves up, close up, make themselves smaller and can’t pump into others. It is possible for people to fake it until they make it. Nonverbal communications can govern both how people feel and think about themselves and also how other people feel and think about them. People smile when they are excited but also feel happy when forced to smile thru holding a pen amid their teeth. A power pose is likely struck by people feeling powerful, but when they pretend to have a powerful feeling they are likely to feel more powerful. People know that their minds can change their bodies (Amy). They should know that their bodies can also change their minds. The minds of the powerful tend to be more optimistic, assertive and confident. They will take more risks as they reason abstractedly (Amy). Difference in physiology is there too, on both the stress hormone and the dominance hormone, cortisol and testosterone respectively. Therefore, when people think of power they should not think on testosterone only but also cortisol as