Hawaiian History :: Hawaii

Hawaiians should have rights to their own land and not let foreigners disrupt their daily habits and life. If a foreigner takes allegiance to Hawai’i they not only have the accessibility of a citizen but also the perks that go with citizenship. Foreigners would be able to marry the women of Hawai’i while they have wives back home in their previous motherland. Foreigners that are aiding to Hawai’i can stay as aliens and be just as effective. There is no need for them to gain citizenship and take an oath of allegiance for their help. If a foreigner wants a piece a land all he needs to do is take an oath of allegiance and he is able to have a piece of land. If too many foreigners enter Hawai’i, their culture will take over. The majority will consist of the foreigners and their government will take over. Too many foreigners will cause much more damage to the native Hawaiian population. The number of full Hawaiians will decrease if foreigners continu e to enter the island of Hawai’i. Foreigners also brought diseases over to Hawai’i and the Hawaiians did not have a sufficient immune system therefore they died. The population went from one million people to 134,000. This was in a span of forty-five years. Since the haoles were immune to the disease they were able to carry on and grow stronger. Hawaiians thought that since the foreigners were not getting sick they must be considered gods. Lies were repeated over and over by the haole and this is how they built there civilization. Not only did they bring diseases but they also brought merchants. These ruthless, money hungry traders wanted land and ports for shipping. As more foreigners came to Hawai’i, more problems occurred. Priest preached the word of God, Christianity, but this was contradictory to the Hawaiian religion and their way of life. The Hawaiians believed that every single thing in the world had a god. The palm trees had a god, the grass had a god, the ocean had a god, the sky had a god, etc. So when Christianity came, the idea of one God was amazing and absurd to them. I despise the fact that foreigners came here and changed almost every aspect of Hawai’i.

Water Pollution in Our Day Today Life

Water pollution in our day to day life What is water pollution? Water pollution is any chemical, physical or biological change in the quality of water that has a harmful effect on any living thing that drinks or uses or lives (in) it. When humans drink polluted water it often has serious effects on their health. Water pollution can also make water unsuited for the desired use. What are the major water pollutants? There are several classes of water pollutants. The first are disease-causing agents. These are bacteria, viruses, protozoa and parasitic worms that enter sewage systems and untreated waste.A second category of water pollutants is oxygen-demanding wastes; wastes that can be decomposed by oxygen-requiring bacteria. When large populations of decomposing bacteria are converting these wastes it can deplete oxygen levels in the water. This causes other organisms in the water, such as fish, to die. A third class of water pollutants is water-soluble inorganic pollutants, such as aci ds, salts and toxic metals. Large quantities of these compounds will make water unfit to drink and will cause the death of aquatic life.Another class of water pollutants are nutrients; they are water-soluble nitrates and phosphates that cause excessive growth of algae and other water plants, which deplete the water's oxygen supply. This kills fish and, when found in drinking water, can kill young children. Water can also be polluted by a number of organic compounds such as oil, plastics and pesticides, which are harmful to humans and all plants and animals in the water. A very dangerous category is suspended sediment, because it causes depletion in the water's light absorption and the particles spread dangerous compounds such as pesticides through the water.Finally, water-soluble radioactive compounds can cause cancer, birth defects and genetic damage and are thus very dangerous water pollutants. More information on health effects of microrganisms Where does water pollution come fro m? Water pollution is usually caused by human activities. Different human sources add to the pollution of water. There are two sorts of sources, point and nonpoint sources. Point sources discharge pollutants at specific locations through pipelines or sewers into the surface water. Nonpoint sources are sources that cannot be traced to a single site of discharge.Examples of point sources are: factories, sewage treatment plants, underground mines, oil wells, oil tankers and agriculture. Examples of nonpoint sources are: acid deposition from the air, traffic, pollutants that are spread through rivers and pollutants that enter the water through groundwater. Nonpoint pollution is hard to control because the perpetrators cannot be traced. How do we detect water pollution? Water pollution is detected in laboratories, where small samples of water are analysed for different contaminants.Living organisms such as fish can also be used for the detection of water pollution. Changes in their behav iour or growth show us, that the water they live in is polluted. Specific properties of these organisms can give information on the sort of pollution in their environment. Laboratories also use computer models to determine what dangers there can be in certain waters. They import the data they own on the water into the computer, and the computer then determines if the water has any impurities. What is heat pollution, what causes it and what are the dangers?In most manufacturing processes a lot of heat originates that must be released into the environment, because it is waste heat. The cheapest way to do this is to withdraw nearby surface water, pass it through the plant, and return the heated water to the body of surface water. The heat that is released in the water has negative effects on all life in the receiving surface water. This is the kind of pollution that is commonly known as heat pollution or thermal pollution. The warmer water decreases the solubility of oxygen in the wate r and it also causes water organisms to breathe faster.Many water organisms will then die from oxygen shortages, or they become more susceptible to diseases. For more information about this, you can take a look at thermal pollution. What is eutrophication, what causes it and what are the dangers? Eutrophication means natural nutrient enrichment of streams and lakes. The enrichment is often increased by human activities, such as agriculture (manure addition). Over time, lakes then become eutrophic due to an increase in nutrients. Eutrophication is mainly caused by an increase in nitrate and phosphate levels and has a negative influence on water life.This is because, due to the enrichment, water plants such as algae will grow extensively. As a result the water will absorb less light and certain aerobic bacteria will become more active. These bacteria deplete oxygen levels even further, so that only anaerobic bacteria can be active. This makes life in the water impossible for fish and other organisms. What is acid rain and how does it develop? Typical rainwater has a pH of about 5 to 6. This means that it is naturally a neutral, slightly acidic liquid.During precipitation rainwater dissolves gasses such as carbon dioxide and oxygen. The industry now emits great amounts of acidifying gasses, such as sulphuric oxides and carbon monoxide. These gasses also dissolve in rainwater. This causes a change in pH of the precipitation – the pH of rain will fall to a value of or below 4. When a substance has a pH of below 6. 5, it is acid. The lower the pH, the more acid the substance is. That is why rain with a lower pH, due to dissolved industrial emissions, is called acid rain. Why does water sometimes smell like rotten eggs?When water is enriched with nutrients, eventually anaerobic bacteria, which do not need oxygen to practice their functions, will become highly active. These bacteria produce certain gasses during their activities. One of these gases is hydrogen sulphide. This compounds smells like rotten eggs. When water smells like rotten eggs we can conclude that there is hydrogen present, due to a shortage of oxygen in the specific water. What causes white deposit on showers and bathroom walls? Water contains many compounds. A few of these compounds are calcium and carbonate.Carbonate works as a buffer in water and is thus a very important component. When calcium reacts with carbonate a solid substance is formed, that is called lime. This lime is what causes the white deposit on showers and bathroom walls and is commonly known as lime deposit. It can be removed by using a specially suited cleaning agent. More specific information on water pollutants or freshwater pollution is now available or take a look at types of pollution for freshwater For water terminology check out our Water Glossary or go back to water FAQ overview Feel free to contact us if you have any other questionsAbout Lenntech Turnkey plants Pilot plants Containerized pla nts Services Career at Lenntech International Internships Periodic table Calculators Visitors information Our partners Contact us Lenntech BV Rotterdamseweg 402 M 2629 HH Delft The Netherlands tel: +31 15 261 09 00 fax: +31 15 261 62 89 e-mail: [email  protected] com Request a quote ? Home Applications Processes Systems Products Library Languages Copyright  © 1998-2011 Lenntech B. V | Email: [email  protected] com | Tel. +31 15 261 09 00 | Fax. +31-15-2616289 Read more: http://www. lenntech. com/water-pollution-faq. htm#ixzz2Ccrcb1wl

Fuzzy logic in car safty

Car safety issues are wide-reaching problem. This problem is mainly due to human driving which involves reaction times, delays, and Judgment errors that may affect traffic flow and cause accidents. In some cases, the cause of the accident is distraction on the part of the driver and failure to react in time. Even in some cases, it could be cause by environmental factors (Song, 2005). Advanced system of auxiliary functions has been developed to help avoid such accident and minimize the effects of collision should one occur.Fuzzy logic provides tools for dealing with imprecision, which is fundamental to many engineering problems. The level of safety in our society could be archived by applying fuzzy logic control system. Fuzzy logic control technique has become an active area of research in the application of industrial processes, which are not friendly to straight control techniques. It attempts to emulate human mind for checking the processes parameters and to take decisions regardin g the control action (Eugene, 1985).Fuzzy control become a huge industry in Japan and other countries where it was adapted into home appliances such as scum cleaners, microwaves ovens, video cameras, washing machines, etc. A fuzzy controller acts or regulates by means of rules in a more or less natural language, based on the distinguishing feature: fuzzy logic. On the other hand, to reduce car accidents we are going to examine a system, which makes the drivers, pay more attention and alert them before an accident takes place.Because of this, we shall acknowledge the digital systems because they are easier to handle with, so the first thing in the development is to convert all variations in the car environment into digital signals without any changes. The ultrasonic transmitter circuit sends its vibrations in front of car, when these vibrations reflected the ultrasonic receiver circuit would take these vibrations and amplify it. Moreover, send it to the microelectronic, which can com pute the distance between the car and anything in front it (as shown in the figure 1 below).At the same time, the Infrared ‘R) circuit senses the round of the wheel and sends it signal to the microelectronic, which can compute the car speed. After that, the microelectronic sends the output signal to the speaker and The LCD. In addition, of these output devices the microelectronic sends output data to a personal computer using the serial port. Figure 1: Overview of the used hardware; copied figure (from Journal of Computer science 4 (1 2): 1061-1063, 2008]) We shall consider developing level of safety under three steps, which are: Defining level of safety Calculating each degrees of risk between two vehicles, and Combining these degrees to level of safety with average speeds in some divisions (Method et al, 2001). In the other hand, to ascertain the danger degrees of each car, and the base elements, fuzzy sets and their membership functions, are define by using survey data and degrees of risk (Chunk, 2003). In addition, if-then rules of inference engine are made by rough set theory.Conclusively, to get the level of safety in some divisions, fuzzy membership function values of each safety result is averaged, and a method to et ‘Level of Safety based on these degrees relates with an average of safety speeds is suggested. Definition of Level of Safety Safety being a wide-reaching problem, has gained various definitions from several authors. The level of safety in a road division means the grades, which people feel about the possibility to experience, rear-end collision including relentlessness in the division (Song, 2003).This definition is composed of three elements related with roads in themselves, driving behaviors in this road, and relation between drivers and roads. These three factors are mix in microscopic driving behaviors on roads, and five gyroscopic traffic condition variables are selected such as velocity and acceleration of lead and follow ing cars, and the gap distance between these cars divided the minimum safety distance (Method et al, 2001). The minimum safety distance (MS) is the distance that following car needs to avoid a rear-end collision.The traffic condition in itself can be included into velocity, drivers' behaviors are able to be included into oscillations of accelerations in every two seconds, and degree of risk in the system can explain the gap distance divided the minimum safety distance (MS). Where, : following Car speed Response time : Possible deceleration rate However, these results are not level of safety but risk degrees of two Cars (Fuller, 2005). Definition of Fuzzy Sets and Membership Function The member functions are divided into speed fuzzy sets and acceleration fuzzy sets (Method et al, 2001).Speed fuzzy sets are composed of three sets, ‘high speed', ‘medium speed', and ‘low speed'. Their membership functions are based on macroscopic traffic condition data and number of ac cident. Acceleration fuzzy sets also consist of three sets, ‘positive acceleration', ‘no acceleration', and ‘negative acceleration', and membership functions, which are based on microscopic field, survey data and maximum and common acceleration rates of vehicles. The gap distance/MS sets are divided into three fuzzy sets, ‘more than 1', ‘around 1', and ‘less than 1' using microscopic data.The combined danger degrees are about from 0. 4 to 0. 55 that corresponds to common situation defined in fuzzy set, and this result means that people drives more or less safely bearing some anger because there are possibility to happen accidents in traffic condition in itself but drivers believe that they can response properly to a danger situation. Moreover, this result shows that there are some danger situations n each two vehicle, but in road divisions, the danger degrees become normalized.Figure 3: Relation between Speed and Danger Degrees For this reason, â €˜Level of Safety should not include the combined danger degree directly, and should be deducted from relationship between speeds as well as danger degrees. In order to find their relation, pairs of average speed and danger degree are, shown in figure 3. We find that danger degrees are low in low speed level and high in fast speed level, and the level of change is not high in low and rapid speed situations. However, in medium speed case, danger degrees are increase vapidly, and there are two points of inflection.If danger degrees do not change rapidly, drivers would react properly because their expectations to the road conditions are fixed, but if they change fast, the situation on a road division would be dangerous because the expectation of drivers cannot be fix. Consequently, the simple possibility of accidents depends on the grades of change in danger degrees, and the severity depends on the quantity of danger degrees. Conclusively, this seminar suggests ‘Level of Safet y such as in Figure 4. First, range of Level of Safety in which relentlessness and possibility of accident is high is defined as Very dangerous situation', E.Similarly, that of range which relentlessness or possibility is high is suggested as ‘dangerous situation', D, and which relentlessness and possibility is usual as ‘common situation', C, and which possibility is low and relentlessness is high as ‘safe situation', B, and which possibility and relentlessness is low as Very safe situation', A, these are shown in Table 3 below. Finally, relation of danger degrees and average speeds develops the intercepts of each level of safety, UT it needs to be more precisely define by further study based on more investigation.Table 3: Level of Safety Definition The possibility The severity The range(km/hrs) Very safe -18 c 25-40 (or) High 18-25, 40-53 53-63 Figure 4: copied figure (from [Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies]) 8. 0 CONCLUSION This seminar work shows how the system provides a solution to decrease the car accidents by giving the drivers more time to avoid the accidents. Adjusting the sensitivity and the accuracy for the measuring circuits is important to ensure that the assured parameters represent its actual values.The use of microelectronic makes it possible to implement the system with less hardware components. The microelectronic, FISTICUFF was chosen among all the other microelectronics because of its low-cost and small size. In addition, we evaluated safety degrees on a road division, and suggest ‘Level of safety. The method to develop ‘Level of Safety from degrees of danger and combined using fuzzy theory, and we combined danger degrees to define level of service with average speeds. This is the first trial to define

The Truman Show Analysis

Everything in my reality—the activities I engage in, the friendships I acquire, the family I love, the beliefs I form (about art, politics, religion, morality, the afterlife)—are predicated upon the assumption that my life is truly and authentically mine to live, not something counterfeit or staged. I am the author that gives meaning to my reality. I am, so to speak, the star of the show. In Peter Weir’s film about the ultimate â€Å"reality† TV show The Truman Show (1998), the ever ominous â€Å"what is real† question begs the assumption that the lives we live are really ours. It is an important text to consider with respect to those other difficult questions we all seem to either explore or avoid: Who am I? Why am I here? What’s it all about? Am I living in a counterfeit world where my choices ultimately bear no significance? If so, is a meaningful life even possible? These are crucial questions that pertain to humanity, ones that The Truman Show seeks not necessarily to answer directly but rather explore through speculation, inquiry and character/plot subtext. They are also questions that lead us to consider how Truman’s awakening into â€Å"the real† is a type of our own awakening, and why opting for reality over appearance is something worth striving for. The great difficulty of the film regards the term â€Å"reality†Ã¢â‚¬â€1). What it means in context of Truman’s world, 2). Christof’s world, 3). The audience-within-the-film’s world, 4). The spectators who watch the film’s world, and 5). The overall statement Weir is making about reality in general. That is five different realities, each which carry delicate nuances about its semantically complex nature. Indeed, spectators are left to question like Truman does when he discovers the fabrication of his existence, â€Å"Was nothing real? † Well, what is real in The Truman Show? Who or what social forces construct his/our reality? Weir seems to intentionally leave open gaps in answers to these types of questions to involve spectators more in the process of constructing the film’s textual meaning. He also seems to posit a â€Å"real world† of some sort beyond Truman’s manufactured one, but is unclear as to what that â€Å"real† one is and why Truman/spectators should want it. The ambiguous challenge of the film therefore inevitably forces us to dive into the precarious realm of metaphysics—the realm where we ponder what reality is like. It is in this realm where Weir asks us to become metaphysicians in order to explore what this nebulous term â€Å"reality† even means. One film theoretician whose ideas can help dissect the subtle nuances of how reality is played with in The Truman Show is Nick Browne. To provide a brief caveat on Browne’s theories, it is pertinent to understand that he explores the ways in which film form (camera angle, mis-en-scene, dialogue, etc. ) relates to film content (theme, moral order, etc. . He views the director as a narrator who invites the spectator into the text to partake of a certain relationship not only between the characters and their beliefs, but also the director and his beliefs. According to Browne, certain narrators have been known to override the traditional meaning of filmic codes (e. g. IMR) by using formal methods to make a statement about the film’s moral order. In what he calls â€Å"the power of the gaze,† the narrator demonstrates that the person who holds the most powerful point-of-view—or gaze—over another character, according to the traditional codes is, in fact, wrong in his/her judgment. Browne therefore emphasizes the narrator’s role as using the conventional language of film â€Å"against itself† in order to make a provocative statement about the film’s content (13). Peter Weir plays the role of what Browne calls the â€Å"narrator-in-the-text,† one who has invited us to ascertain the â€Å"moral order† of the film. The moral order of The Truman Show pertains to the five aforementioned levels of reality and how spectators are to interpret them. Using Browne’s updated version of formalism, the essay will argue how â€Å"Weir† steps into the text using dialogue and camera angle to present the great moral order of the film—the issue of what it means to see reality truly. Aspects of Browne’s â€Å"power of the gaze† will be useful to bolster the fact that although spectators identify with Truman throughout the film, their identification with him cannot help but be predominantly filtered through Christof’s all-powerful, watch-tower gaze; a perspective that Weir-as-narrator-in-the-text is ultimately going to argue, using neo-formalism (e. g. specifically camera angle), as being wrong in judgment. In particular, the essay will provide concrete examples from the film of how Weir uses shifting camera perspectives of how spectators view Truman, whether through Christof’s autocratic gaze (what I will argue as the â€Å"despotic perspective†) or through the omniscient perspective that frees Truman from Christof’s â€Å"intricate network of hidden cameras† (TS). The shifting camera perspectives will create what Browne labels â€Å"the plural subject†Ã¢â‚¬â€the notion that forces/leads/or guides spectators not only to identify with certain characters, but also â€Å"to be at two places at once, where the camera is and ‘with’ the depicted person† (127). As applied and will be argued in this paper, the filmic spectator is the â€Å"plural subject† that is consistently sutured or locked between the â€Å"despotic† and â€Å"omniscient† perspective when viewing Truman, thereby creating a â€Å"double structure of viewer/viewed† (127). These structures inevitably challenge spectators to wrestle with how reality is portrayed in The Truman Show and how the varying lenses of representation regarding â€Å"reality† carry certain implications under the despotic perspective, and likewise under the omniscient one. Understanding how â€Å"Weir† uses these ambiguous camera perspectives (i. e. structures) will help us further see how reality operates according to the film’s five aforementioned realities. They will also help clarify what Browne means when he says â€Å"such structures, which in shaping and presenting the action prompt a manner and indeed a path of reading, convey and are closely allied to the guiding moral commentary of the film† (131-132). Certainly The Truman Show is complex and ambivalent, one that demands a sensitive read. We will therefore begin with a brief plot synopsis of the film, move towards the evidence that shows how Browne’s neo-formalist theories of the â€Å"power of the gaze† and â€Å"plural subject† relate to Weir’s use of â€Å"despotic† and â€Å"omniscient† camera perspectives, and overall tie-in how these ideas pertain to the five levels of reality in the film. The Truman Show depicts the life of Truman Burbank (Jim Carrey), the first child legally adopted by a corporation for the purposes of filming his entire life â€Å"recorded on an intricate network of hidden cameras, and broadcast live and unedited twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week to an audience around the globe† (TS). Christof (Ed Harris), the show’s creator, lives in a reality governed by â€Å"television ratings† and media hype. He convinces Truman that he inhabits a benign and ordinary world, but little oes he know that everything he does is monitored, controlled and manufactured under the totalitarian gaze of Christof. While the world he occupies is virtually counterfeit and full of actors—even his wife Meryl (Laura Linney) and best friend Marlon (Noah Emmerich)—Truman is unaware that his life is being used to entertain humanity in a non-stop reality program. Audiences within the film glue themselves anxiously to the screen wondering â€Å"How will it end? †Ã¢â‚¬â€a slogan captured on buttons, T-shirts and posters purchased by fans of the show. Their reality revolves around watching Truman live out his happy cliched existence in the idyllic hometown of Seahaven until gradually certain events cause him to question the perception of his alleged reality: camera lights fall from the sky, actors fail to follow their cues, backstage set dressings are exposed, etc. These curious events begin to awaken Truman to the constructs that have sought to blind him his entire life. He realizes that something is wrong and goes to great lengths to break free from his contrived world that was invented by Christof and the scheming media. At the climactic end of the film, Truman reaches towards an open door that will lead him into another world, but is cautioned by his Creator not to leave for fear that he will â€Å"not like what [he] finds† (TS). In the end, Truman rejects his counterfeit heaven and chooses an authentic, although unknown and presumably difficult, life as substitute. Using certain aspects from Browne’s theories, let us now consider how Weir-as-narrator-in-the-text carefully crafts the meaning of Truman’s, Christof’s, the audience-within-the-film, and the audience outside the film’s reality. The film opens with Christof talking directly to the camera in Brechtian style to the spectators in the theater. He admits that while Truman’s world â€Å"is in some respects counterfeit,† he assures us that â€Å"there’s nothing fake about Truman himself. No scripts, no cue cards†¦It isn’t always Shakespeare but it’s genuine. It’s a life† (TS). Christof suggests here that while Truman has been duped to believe he is living a â€Å"real life† he has chosen for himself, the life he has given Truman is better than what he later calls the â€Å"sick real world†Ã¢â‚¬â€the one outside Truman’s studio. Paradoxically, he claims that there is â€Å"nothing fake about Truman himself† yet in the same breath admits that the reality he occupies is counterfeit. For the Marxist critic, Christof’s philosophy might beg the question of how a person can be â€Å"authentic† or â€Å"real† if human identity is nothing more than a product of the economic environment he/she lives in. In fact, Marx’s statement that â€Å"man’s social existence determines his consciousness† seems to expose the very flaw of Christof’s viewpoint that Truman is somehow a true-man despite living a social sham. Nevertheless, backstage interviews with Truman’s perky wife, Meryl, and best friend, Marlon, are then juxtaposed together that reinforce the paradoxical nature of Christof’s philosophy, â€Å"It’s all true, it’s all real. Nothing here is fake, nothing you see on this show is fake†¦it’s just merely controlled† (TS). Upon the closure of these lines, we immediately cut into Truman’s phony world where Christof’s pervasive surveillance equipment watches his every move. Using Browne’s â€Å"power of the gaze,† we can see how spectators are thus sutured into Christof’s powerful, Big Brother gaze over Truman. In fact, spectators cannot help but see Truman through Christof’s point-of-view throughout the majority of the film since the studio cameras record and reveal everything he does. However, even though we might be forced into Christof’s POV, it is debatable whether â€Å"Weir† is asking spectators to agree with his schemes as morally laudable. For instance, given Christof’s demeanor of totalitarian spectatorship over Truman, the spectator watching The Truman Show the film might feel unsure if whether to trust his perspective; whether he/she is seeing truly through his perspective. After all, Christof’s reality is centered on the fabrication of Truman’s entire reality: his childhood, his job, even his marriage. He even goes as far to manufacture his fears, like his fear of water, which is used to keep Truman from escaping the studio of Seahaven, escaping from his false self. As Kimberly A. Blessing observes, â€Å"Everyone, including his adoring television viewing audience, is complicit in the lie†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (5-6). One possible meaning that we can extract here is that â€Å"Weir† is crafting Christof’s reality in a way that challenges the public’s perception of how the media operates. The media, like Christof, would have us live inside a fictitious world governed by commercial glamour that fuels their sales, ratings, product placement, etc. Just as the creators of Truman’s world commercialize his life with product placement ads, like when Meryl showcases the wonders of a new kitchen utensil to Truman but is really advertising it to the millions of viewers watching, so too is â€Å"Weir† making a satirical commentary on how the creators of media attempt to commercialize our lives by getting us to buy their products. The question becomes, then, whether a person who lies even for an allegedly noble cause can be trusted. How noble are Christof’s intentions anyway if he is deceiving Truman in order to receive higher television ratings? There seems to be no escape from Christof’s questionable morality or autocratic gaze, but it is here that â€Å"Weir† carefully steps into the text and shows us through camera angle and plot progression that Truman and spectators alike can escape from Christof’s duplicitous schemes. No sooner when the camera light falls from the sky and Truman begins to sense something is wrong with his reality that â€Å"Weir† intermediately switches from Christof’s camera perspective (the â€Å"despotic perspective†) to the omniscient perspective when viewing Truman. The omniscient perspective is void of the studio camera’s edges that remind spectators they are sutured into Christof’s POV. Instead, the omniscient perspective is transcendent, clear and fledgling as it frees Truman and spectators from Christof’s gripping surveillance, but it also is transient. Just as it will take the entire film for Truman to realize the extent to which he is being deceived, it will also take the entire film for â€Å"Weir† to gradually overwhelm the despotic perspective with the omniscient one. As a result of these double-shifting, ambivalent camera POV’s, we can see by using what Browne calls the â€Å"plural subject† that â€Å"Weir† is asking us to be at two places at once: where the camera is and from whose perspective we’re seeing Truman from. The difficulty here is that although spectators are implicated into Truman’s life and naturally yearn to identify with him, it is imperative to remember that â€Å"the logic of the framing† and our identification with him has already been subjugated primarily through a liar’s eyes (Braudy & Cohen 127). Consequently, it becomes tricky to discern whether we’re ever actually identifying with the â€Å"real† Truman or just Christof’s deceitful version of him. But of course, this is what the film is about. It is about asking us what it means to see with eyes truly, whether we’re all being duped inside Christof’s matrix so to speak, and whether it is possible to awaken from counterfeit reality to something truly authentic. The presentational structure of the film argues that although we identify with Truman through a liar’s eyes, we do not have to accept that POV as morally commendable, but can reject and feel liberated from it when viewing Truman omnisciently. Because of these presentational structures that Browne argues â€Å"convey a point of view† and are â€Å"fundamental to the exposition to the moral idea† of the film, Truman, like spectators, must achieve awareness of their constructed or controlled-by-another’s kind of existence, and choose to embrace a â€Å"reality† that is not manufactured by another individual or economic system (131-132). In several instances of the film, Truman tries to gain this awareness by escaping from Seahaven. He drives his car to the edge of the forest and sails through a massive typhoon but gets blocked at every turn. Christof, like the media, has trapped Truman inside his false reality and does not want him to leave. Truman even receives help from certain cast-members of the show who try to reveal the truth to him, whether flying over head with signs reading, â€Å"Truman, you’re on television,† or jumping out of present boxes screaming the same. Weir-as-narrator-in-the-text is â€Å"telling us,† as Ken Sanes argues, â€Å"that we too have to take a journey—of mind—and distance ourselves from this media landscape, if we want to secure our freedom† (Sanes). The strategy of despotic/omniscient perspective in particular helps â€Å"Weir† establish these moral orders by focusing on the relationship between Truman and Christof, truth-seeker and pseudo-truth giver, for it seems as though he subverts the traditional IMR codes of who spectators are supposed to identify with. Again, despite seeing the majority of Truman’s life from the despotic perspective, the sparse use of the omniscient one is where â€Å"Weir† is actively engaged in the text and leading us to accept Truman’s final choice of rejecting his manufactured reality as indeed the correct choice. Weir uses the cinematographic apparatus to lead spectators to see the truth about Truman, to become more aware about their own susceptibility to â€Å"false ealities† and in doing so uses the conventional language of the film as Browne would argue â€Å"against itself† by reversing the traditional meaning of form to make a statement about content. He shows through the despotic perspective that although Christof’s version of pampered reality for Truman might hold noble intentions—indeed, Christof is convinced he is actually helping Truman by sheltering him from the â€Å"sick real world†Ã¢â‚¬â€he is in fact wrong in his judgment because reality, even if unknown or â€Å"sick,† must be preferred to some counterfeit version of it.

Boethius Was Successful in His Argument That God Rewards

‘Boethius was successful in his argument that God rewards and punishes justly. ’ Discuss (35) Boethius was a philosopher teaching at the end of the Roman empire, in his 40’s he was arrested for suspected conspiracy with the Eastern Roman Empire and was eventually put to death at the age of about 44/45. Whilst in prison Boethius wrote his book, ‘The Consolation of Philosophy’ where he discusses in great depth with Lady Philosophy issues with God’s omniscience.In his writings, Boethius identifies an issue with God’s foreknowledge, our personal autonomy and the impact of how we are to be judged as when we enter the life after this. He identifies that if God has foreknowledge and knows our future, He then knows what we are going to do which in turn removes the idea that we have freedom to do what we choose. He also sees that if we have no free will when it comes to our judgement we will be judged unfairly and unjustly as God will have caused us to do that evil or not intervened to stop us from committing that evil. There seems to be a considerable contradiction and inconsistency between God’s foreknowledge and the existence of free will. ’ (Boethius). Boethius in his book creates a dialogue with Lady Philosophy, a personification of pure reason, whilst he plays a naive questioner. Boethius starts by questioning whether we have free will or not to which Lady Philosophy replies. She appears to Boethius and reassures that as we have the ability to reason we must then have free will and this is due to fact that our reason is what we use to make judgements which enables us to make decisions.However there are different classes of freedom, the most is when we are in contemplation and the least is when we are addicted our let our desires rule our head. This however creates another issue for Boethius, if we are free then we will be able to do what we like however if God knows what we are going to do then we must n ot have free will. It is impossible for God to be wrong as he is God and is omniscience. Lady Philosophy answers Boethius be replying that God is eternal in the sense that he is a temporal, existing outside the category of time itself.However there is another definition of which Boethius thought was unsuitable. God is eternal and he has no begging or no end, he always has existed and continues to do so. Boethius rejects this as he can’t see how a temporal God can judge someone if he experiences time himself. On the other hand Boethius didn’t consider the flaws of his definition of eternal God; a God that is outside the category of time is one whom cannot be personal, this also means that it doesn’t fit in with the traditional religious view of God who keeps his covenant with his people and sends his son to save us.But it also has its strengths such as it maintains the majority of the attributes of God, such as incorporeal and immutable. Boethius concluded from h is characterization of an eternal god that God is like a bird flying over a man walking down the path, the bird can see where the man has been, where he is and where he is about to go all at once. This is a power that God is able to use due to him being outside of time, he can see everyone’s past present and future simultaneously. His knowledge is total however not causal.Boethius expands on his idea of divine foreknowledge and goes onto explain the different types of necessity; simple and contingent. Simple necessity is related to a person’s nature so for example â€Å"man is a rational animal. † Whereas conditional necessity isn’t tied to the objects nature so for example you see Socrates sitting down it is conditional necessity because it is not in his nature to sit down as he has freedom to stand up in the next moment. From this Boethius concludes that God’s knowledge is total and not causal, he maintains that we have personal freedom and that God rewards and punishes us justly.However through this though a temporal God can be seen as an un-caring and un-omnibenpevolant as he cannot interact with us, he cannot answer our prayers, intervene with us and perform the miracles in the world. Conversely if we do not try to defend our personal freedom we also result in an un-loving and un-caring God. To conclude, I feel that Boethius was successful in his argument that God rewards and punishes us justly however in doing so moves away from an omnibenevolant God and towards a God who can only look on without helping us, it also undermines God’s omnipotence as he cannot interact with us.

Team Empowerment Through Effective Communication Case Study

Team Empowerment Through Effective Communication - Case Study Example With this type of set-up that allow creative and innovative juices to flow through the constant sharing of information, people could appropriate division of labor among the members of the team can lead to the more effective, more efficient and less stressful workplace. Their high levels of performance with regards to quantity, quality, and timeliness of work results can contribute to their sense of satisfaction, addressing a psychological and motivational need. With incessant exposure to each other, team members and their superiors could ascertain whether they have a team that can continue working together with synergy or their togetherness poses a detrimental effect on their output and interrelationships. This is why effective communication is very crucial in a group or a team. Lack of communication could sometimes produce unfavorable working environments. For example, Susan had worked in supply-chain management of a certain company for three years. She enjoyed her work in large part because her boss, Tim McGuire, was a great guy to work for. Then Tim got promoted six months ago and Chuck Benson took his place. Susan says her job is a lot more frustrating now. "Tim and I were on the same wavelength. It's not that way with Chuck. He tells me something and I do it. Then he tells me I did it wrong. I think he means one thing but says something else. It's been like this since the day he arrived.

Sustainability Challenge Associated with Urban Dynamics Essay

Sustainability Challenge Associated with Urban Dynamics - Essay Example Urban sprawl did not start recently. It started a long time ago. Here, we find that the rich had a desire to seek the pleasure of living in secluded areas with low population densities. The Chinese and the Romans historically practiced this habit of the rich living in suburbs with protective walls (Karen & J. Marshall, 2009 p 2). The sprawl in cities and towns always occur when the city has reached peak economic growth. Therefore, at first population density in the city center is normally high. As the city develops, this density reduces as people move away from the center due to improved services such transportation.Scholars, planners, public officials and community activists have offered many possibilities that cause urban sprawl. These causes include lack of comprehensive planning, rapid population growth, consumer preferences and subsidized infrastructure improvements.Lack of comprehensive planning is one of the principal urban sprawl causes. Poorly planned developments in the out skirts of urban centers often happen due to officials planning in a densely populated urban area without consulting nearby communities (Chiara et al, 2010, p 3). The resultant less densely populated regions demand high expenses for infrastructural development. Rapid population growth is another key factor responsible for urban sprawl especially in the Southern and Western United States regions (Klaufus, 2010, p 5). When the population of a city increases, people will tend to move spreading. further from the city centres. When communities in the urban fringes enjoy subsidies of roads, sewers and water from municipalities, unplanned developments easily sprawl in the regions. Some people prefer living in isolated places with much space for large homes, large yards and more bedrooms. This desire means movement of people away from densely populated city centres. The movement results in spreading of cities and progressively reduction in population density away from the city centre. A lack of understanding of unplanned growth consequences may also lead to urban sprawl. The government in most cases has not taken a consideration of the implications of urban sprawl. The government’s action of allowing developers to do as they wish may also cause urban sprawl. When people over depend on automobiles for transportation, urban sprawl may also result. Developments in the urban areas involve the use of materials such as stone, cement and asphalt. Subsidies on automobiles play a critical role in the spreading of urban sprawl. This, according to Hanson (1992), enables automobile owners to incur low costs of