Marijuana Legalization Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Marijuana Legalization - Essay Example As a result, the government should rethink the benefits that it would accrue from legalizing marijuana in the country. This paper will therefore, discuss reasons why the government should legalize marijuana. It is clear that marijuana has a major impact on the health of the human beings when abused. Many young people who have abused the drug have ended up with mental illness. Majority of them had to be taken to a rehabilitation centers (Travis 1). Others have ended up committing crime in order to sustain the use of the drug. However, the drug has been found to have major benefits when used in the medical settings. It has been clear that illegalizing the use of marijuana has a major impact on its prices. Currently, thirteen states in United States have legalized the use of the drug. However, due to the fact that the drug is illegal in other states, the prices of the drug are very high. This is because the supply is very low. Therefore, with the increasing demand for the drug in the health sector, legalizing it will enable the health centers to get access to the drug. This will serve millions of patients who are in the waiting line (Kreit 1802). In addition, the drug will be available at a cheap price because many farmers will allowed to grow the cannabis plant. Legalizing the use of the drug would have major economic benefits to the government and the people at large. Currently, running the government is costing the tax payers a lot of money. One of the main sectors that are consuming these resources is the security department. Each day hundreds of young people are arrested by the police officers after selling or abusing the drugs. The government is at a crossroad as jails continue to become more congested (Sulum 1). Cases related with this drugs have piled up, an aspect that is putting more strain on the judicial system which is

Concert report for a piano Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Concert report for a piano - Essay Example Since the concert had been advertised some days before, a large number of audiences had turned up. Esther Parker was a well known soloist who had performed with orchestras in both the Asia and the United States of America. She has had the passion for the piano since she was four years old and after moving to the United States of America she began attending piano lessons which later became her foundation in musical arts. She graduated from Yale University with a master’s degree. Tickets could be purchased online before the concert. Most of the people in the audience were students and professors from other departments who had a passion for music. The room was well set for the event and flashy lights had been put in place to add a lovely finish to the whole thing. Additionally, one of the school’s bands broke the ice by entertaining the audience. The room was at full capacity by eight in the evening and those who came late did not find a place to seat. The performance was breath taking especially in places where Parker changed the pitches and speed of play. After the first thirty minutes of her performance, the audience was really moved and we were given a fifteen minutes break to review on her performance. She was full of energy and if given the chance, could continue without a break. As soon as she finished her first session, the audience stood up and clapped almost two minutes appreciating her good work. I could even hear some member begging her to continue playing her piano. As her fingers run through the keyboard we all cheered as we went for the break. Mrs. Parker was very kind as when the audience asked for more of her performance, she was very ready to satisfy us and added another thirty minutes to her performance. According to me, here performance was worth a listen since she used the piano keyboard to provide a harmonic and melodic interplay. Musical styles There are different styles of music worldwide which vary from cultural to social and regional diversities. Different cultures may put up various types of music styles and genres. In the United States, there is the Western style of music production which is not found in other regions. From the performance, Esther Parker plays the Western style of music. Having graduated at an American university, she has coped with the western culture which has helped her perform Western styles of music. Music genres These are categories that can be used to differentiate various types of music according to their traditional and convections. Musical techniques may be used to explain a certain type of genre. For example, there are classical jazz, rock and karaoke genres among others. From the performance, Mrs. Parker plays classical types of songs using her piano. This type of music genre is mostly found in the Western countries, United States of America being part of them. Irrespective of her Asian background, she is able to satisfy the audience with the right kind of music genre. Th e classical genre uses staff notation to distinguish itself from other Western genres. Staff notation is where the soloist changes the pitch, meter, speed and rhythms during performance. As Ether parker played her piano, I could note the change in speed and rhythm. The combination of these effects provided a smooth song for the audience. Classical music was codified in the 18th century and later invented in the 19th century. Orchestras first performed it where different instruments including the piano

Parliamentary Sovereignty in the UK in the Wake of Brexit

Parliamentary Sovereignty in the UK in the Wake of Brexit POn 23 June 2016, the UK government held a referendum to decide whether the country should leave the EU. The majority citizens voted for Brexit (51.89 per cent to 48.11 per cent) with a turnout of 72%, however, they thoroughly fell behind in Scottish and Northern Irish tallies. Be that as it may, the Government was still expected to trigger Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) as soon as possible, without the express permission from Parliament. The Prime Minister at the time, David Cameron, had promised that he would follow through with the outcome, even if that meant leaving the EU (BBC, 2017).[1] However, the situation was not as straightforward as presented by the â€Å"Leave† campaign. The principle of parliamentary sovereignty meant that the referendum result had no legal binding. Therefore, the Prime Minister and government were free to ignore the referendum result if they saw fit. Furthermore, some argued that the government had no right to trigger a leave; only Parliament could do so, as a result of the principle parliamentary sovereignty (Weale, 2017).[2] This paper discusses the topic of parliamentary sovereignty in the UK, particularly in the wake of Brexit, and briefly touches on some social consequences had Parliamentary Sovereignty not been respected. The structure of this paper is therefore as follows: First, Section 1 briefly discusses the history behind parliamentary sovereignty in the UK. Then, Section 2 discusses the Miller Case, a case where the High Court upheld parliamentary sovereignty in the wake of Brexit. Finally, Section 3 explores the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017, an Act of Parliament that grants the government power to leave the EU. 1. The Principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty The idea of parliamentary sovereignty was conceived circa the Case of Proclamations in 1608 (Barnett, 2017).[3] This was a court decision that reduced the power of Monarchs. Essentially, the courts decided that moving forward, Kings and Queens would have to obtain Parliament’s permission to change laws. Specifically, the Case of Proclamations stated that â€Å"the King cannot change any part of the common law [†¦.] without parliament† (House of Lords, 1610).[4] Following this, the English Civil War occurred 1642–1651, where Parliamentarians fought against Royalists for ideals such as parliamentary sovereignty. The Parliamentarians were victorious on such occasion and thus began the ‘Glorious Revolution’ in 1688, which established parliamentary sovereignty in England (Goldsworthy, 2010).[5] Then, in 1689, parliamentary sovereignty was enshrined in the Bill of Rights. Similarly to the Case of Proclamations, this bill requires Monarchs to obtain pe rmission from Parliament before changing laws. Specifically, the Bill of Rights said, â€Å"Suspending the laws or the execution of laws by regal authority without consent of Parliament is illegal† (Parliament of England, 1689).[6] In modern day Britain, Parliament consists of three main decision making bodies: the Sovereign (the monarch, i.e. the King or Queen), the House of Lords (i.e. unelected members of parliament), and the House of Commons (i.e. elected Members of Parliament, or MPs). These three bodies form the highest power in the UK. The fact that Parliament has supreme power is known as parliamentary sovereignty. In the words of Legal commentator Albert Dicey, parliamentary sovereignty gives Parliament the power â€Å"to make or unmake any law whatever† (Dicey, 1915, p.3).[7] The only limits to parliamentary sovereignty are those that Parliament sets itself (Bradley, 2011).[8] An example of this self-enforced limit is Parliament’s subordination of the UK to the EU. This came into effect in 1972, when Parliament signed the European Communities Act, under which the UK was compelled to follow EU law (Barber, 2011).[9] Parliament also has the power to lift its self-imposed limits. For exampl e, Brexit means that Parliament will repeal the European Communities Act, thus ending the EU’s control over the UK (Supreme Court, 2017).[10] It is also important to note that only Parliament can repeal Parliamentary acts. Essentially, the government and Queen cannot repeal Acts of Parliament without Parliament’s permission. 23. Parliamentary sovereignty has been a significant part of many cases and has repeatedly been called upon during cases of importance. A quote from Lord Bingham of Cornhill in R (Jackson) v Attorney General [2005] UKHL 56; [2006] 1 AC 262 at para. [9] encapsulates this significance perfectly: The bedrock of the British constitution is the supremacy of the Crown in Parliament. 2. The Miller Case Following the Brexit referendum in June 2016, Times journalist David Pannick noted that the government could not trigger Article 50 by itself; the government would have to first obtain permission from Parliament (Pannick, 2016).[11] This was because of the principle of parliamentary sovereignty. Specifically, Pannick noted that Parliament had agreed to the European Communities Act in 1972, and because only Parliament can reverse its own decisions, and therefore only Parliament can repeal the act and withdraw from the EU. He also drew attention to Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union, which says, â€Å"any member state may decide to withdraw from the union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements† (EU, 2007).[12] Pannick argued that since parliamentary sovereignty is a constitutional requirement, the EU would not accept the UK’s withdrawal without parliamentary approval (Pannick, 2016).[13] Theresa May was dismissive of these claims. She asserted that they were a tactic to delay Brexit and subvert democracy (BBC, 2017).[14] She also stated that the government did not need parliamentary approval to trigger Article 50 (Freehills, 2016).[15] Notably, Theresa May stated, â€Å"It is up to the Government to trigger Article 50 and the Government alone† (BBC, 2017).[16] Many disagreed with Theresa May, as they believed that withdrawal from the EU without Parliament’s permission would be unlawful (Weale, 2017).[17] Several members of the public felt so strongly about this that took legal action against the government. Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, or the Miller case as it was known informally, was heard in the High Court of Justice. Miller argued that Parliamentary involvement was necessary because: â€Å"By enacting the 1972 Act, Parliament surrendered aspects of its legislative sovereignty and conferred the same upon (what are now) the EU Institutions. Such conferral cannot be undone [†¦] without Parliamentary consent.† (Supreme Court, 2016, p.21)[18] In plain English, Miller’s argument was that considering Parliament surrendered power to the EU in 1972, only Parliament could take this power back (Supreme Court, 2016).[19] The government disagreed with this claim. They believed that once the UK leaves the EU, the European Communities Act 1972 would simply cease to apply, because former treaties would not exist (Supreme Court, 2016; Weale, 2017).[20] Furthermore, the government argued that they had the royal prerogative to override parliamentary sovereignty. The royal prerogative is an old power that allows governments to make decisions without Parliament, in exceptional circumstances (Freehills, 2016).[21] The government also noted a rule that â€Å"the making and unmaking of treaties is [†¦] within the competence of the government† (Supreme Court, 2017, p.84)[22] The case was debated in the High Court for several weeks until the High Court delivered its verdict on 3 November 2016. The High Court ruled in favour of Miller: the government had to obtain parliamentary authority to trigger Article 50. The High Court had agreed with Miller’s arguments about the principle of parliamentary sovereignty (Supreme Court, 2017).[23] The court explained that because of parliamentary sovereignty, only Parliament could repeal the European Communities Act. This is because only Parliament can repeal an Act of Parliament. The High Court also explained that Article 50 would nullify several rights of UK citizens (Supreme Court, 2017).[24] These rights included the right of UK citizens to live and work freely in other EU countries, and the right to 20 days paid holiday under the Working Time Directive 2003. Parliament put these rights in place when it passed the European Communities Act in 1972. The High Court also ruled against the government’s right to use the royal prerogative (Supreme Court, 2017).[25] To explain why, the High Court cited the case of Burmah Oil Co (Burma Trading) Ltd v Lord Advocate [1965] AC 75, 101. This case involved use of the royal prerogative. Lord Reid, dismissed the royal prerogative as a â€Å"relic of a past age† (House of Lords, 1965, p.101).[26] Lord Reid also explained that the royal prerogative is â€Å"only available for a case not covered by statute† (p.101).[27] Typically, the royal prerogative is only for situations such as declaring war, dissolving parliament and governing colonies (Wade, 1961).[28] So, in Miller’s case, the High Court explained that a royal prerogative was inappropriate for triggering Brexit. Therefore, the government did not have the power to trigger Article 50 without Parliament’s approval. The government was unhappy with the High Court’s decision and chose to appeal it, and as a result the case went to the Supreme Court. Ultimately, the Supreme Court dismissed the government’s appeal, citing the same reason as the High Court (Supreme Court, 2017).[29] Essentially, the court explained, the government in 1972 needed Parliament’s approval to sign the 1972 Accession Treaty. This meant that present-day government also needed Parliament’s approval to repeal this treaty (Supreme Court, 2017).[30] Of course, those in the â€Å"Leave† camp were outraged with the High Court’s decision. Like Theresa May, they believed that Parliament was attempting to obstruct the progression of Brexit. A Ukip donor accused the High Court of declaring war on British democracy (Maguire, 2016).[31] In reality, however, this was not the case; the High Court was merely upholding the British constitution as intended, by honouring the principle of parliamentary sovereignty (Weale, 2017)[32] and following the Rule of Law. Importance of the Rule of Law. On 29 March 2017, the Prime Minister wrote to the President of the European Council to notify the European Council of the United Kingdom’s intention to leave the European Unit and the triggering of Article 50 of the Treaty. Brexit is no longer a hypothetical question. It is a concrete fact – it is happening. An issue that has been brought to the front is the belief that the Government has the power, and right, to act on Brexit without Parliaments involvement. This is even more troubling as the very constitution is built upon Parliamentary sovereignty. The issue of human rights comes up as it can be dangerous, in a country where the legislature is mostly under the control of the executive, to leave it solely up to a sovereign Parliament with an absent constitution. If the Parliament can be avoided altogether, this can lead to an even worse situation overall and so highlights how important it was for the Supreme Court in Miller to stand up for and defend the power of Parliament over the executive.   Brexit is one of the most influential and far-reaching changes to the international social and political landscapes today. Brexit will shape Britain, and the international community, for years to come. It is for this reason that it is undeniable that this process should be founded in the rule of law. To comprehend the importance of the rule of law we must give it a clear definition. A well-known definition is that of Lord Bingham: â€Å"that all persons and authorities in the State, whether public or private, should be bound by and be entitled to the benefit of all laws publicly made, taking effect (generally) in the future and publicly administered in the courts.† The Venice Commission has identified the following 8 components of the rule of law: ‘(1) Accessibility of the law (that it be intelligible, clear and predictable); (2) Questions of legal right should be normally decided by law and not discretion; (3) Equality before the law; (4) Power must be exercised lawfully, fairly and reasonably; (5) Human rights must be protected; (6) Means must be provided to resolve disputes without undue cost or delay; (7) Trials must be fair, and (8) Compliance by the state with its obligations in international law as well as in national law.’ The importance of the rule of law is recognised in multiple international documents. For example, the preamble to the UN Declaration of Human Rights notes the importance of the rule of law in protecting human rights. The Treaty on European Union also couples ‘the rule of law and respect for human rights’. It is this human rights element that the remained of this short essay will focus on. Brexit will reform the social landscape of Britain and Europe. It is of paramount importance that the rule of law is respected in this reformation to ensure that fundamental rights, particularly those of minorities and vulnerable individuals, continue to be respected. This is especially true given that there has been much debate as to whether the Brexit vote was fuelled by xenophobia and racism. Research has shown that there was an increase in support for far-right groups during the Brexit campaign and following the murder of Jo Cox. There has also been an alleged escalation in hate crime targeting migrant communities as well an increase in anti-immigration rhetoric. The Brexit vote, coupled with Trump, and the rise of the far-right, summons fears surrounding the polarization of politics and the creeping rise of extremism. With this in mind, it is quite chilling to consider Lord Bingham’s thoughts on a system which is not founded on the rule of law: â€Å"The hallmark of a regime which flouts the rule of law are, alas, all too familiar: the midnight knock on the door, the sudden disappearance, the show trial, the subjection of prisoners to genetic experiments, the confession extracted by torture, the gulag and the concentration camp, the gas chamber, the practice of genocide and ethnic cleansing, the waging of aggressive wars.† In a time when international politics is becoming increasingly unclear and strained and communities are fraught with increased fear and racial tensions, now more than ever, the rule of law and the importance of Parliamentary Sovereignty must be respected. As noted by the Prime Minister, the task before the British nation is momentous but it should not be insurmountable. Britain post-Brexit has an unclear future and an undefined path. By adhering to the rule of law, the certainty, stability and protection that it provides will ensure that this difficult task is negotiated with the utmost respect for all peoples and their inalienable human rights. 3. The European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017 Given that the Supreme Court had dismissed the government’s appeal, the government now needed Parliament’s approval to trigger Article 50. In order to receive this approval, the government introduced a new bill in Parliament. This bill was called the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017.Essentially, this bill would give Theresa May the power to trigger Article 50. However, Parliament had the power to reject the bill if it felt appropriate. This was again because of parliamentary sovereignty (Weale, 2017).[33] Despite that most voters voted ‘Leave’ in the referendum, this result was not legally binding and Parliament could ignore the referendum result. The principle of parliamentary sovereignty means that the ultimate power rests with Parliament, not the public nor the results of referendums. The public only have the power to elect MPs, and once elected, MPs can go against the wishes of their constituents and make their own decisions if they want to. MPs can even go against a referendum result, despite that this might cause great anger with the British public. As Dicey stated, â€Å"the electors can in the long run always enforce their will† (Dicey, 1915).[34] However,   all three decision making bodies of Parliament – the Queen, the House of Lords and the House of Commons – approved the Notification of Withdrawal Act (BBC, 2017).[35] The Queen gave the final green flag on 16 March 2017. This gave the Prime Minister the power trigger to Article 50 and inform the EU of the UK’s withdrawal. The government officially triggered Article 50 on 29 March 2017, when a UK envoy delivered a letter of withdrawal to the President of the European Council (BBC, 2017).[36] The issue of parliamentary sovereignty then took a back seat as the UK began exit negotiations with the EU. Of the 170,000 statutory instruments that have been sent to Parliament in the last 65 years, only seventeen have been rejected, and any substantive debate over individual instruments is a rare occurrence. Responsibility has been delegated for regulation both to the government and the European Union. For this reason, possibly up to sixty per cent of UK law may be derived from EU law in some way. Furthermore, for many years, legislative and technical expertise in the pertinent areas have again been delegated to Brussels. This leaves domestic civil servants under prepared to handle the of important decisions that will need to be made in the coming years. David Allen Green’s analysis is difficult to refute: â€Å"under the cloak of the referendum result there will be a power grab by Whitehall from Westminster. Those rejoicing at â€Å"taking back control† should be careful what they wish for. The executive is, as usual, wanting to take control away from Parliament.† On many occasions, it has been asserted that because the ‘people have spoken’ through the referendum, it gives the executive the right to push onward without the consent of Parliament. On many occasions, it has been asserted that because the ‘people have spoken’ through the referendum, it gives the executive the right to push onward without the consent of Parliament. Does this mean that the claims of direct democracy, in the form of the referendum, trump the claims of Parliamentary representative democracy, with the paradoxical effect of giving more power to the executive? The greater part have affirmed that referenda are in and of themselves a product of Parliamentary authority and must accordingly rely on the statute which enables them. The 2015 EU referendum Act only called for the referendum to take place, without establishing how to approach it or the potential consequences. ‘Where, as in this case, implementation of a referendum result requires a change in the law of the land, and statute has not provided for that change, the change in the law must be made in the only way in which the UK constitution permits, namely through Parliamentary legislation.’ The actual political importance of a referendum is not subverted however. What is does assert is the basic dogma that, in a democracy, the people can speak through their representatives in Parliament. Nevertheless, direct democracy cannot be operationalised by giving undiluted power to the executive. 4. Conclusion This paper has discussed parliamentary sovereignty in the UK in the wake of Brexit. First, Section 1 introduced the concept of parliamentary sovereignty in the UK. This section explained that parliamentary sovereignty goes back to the 17th century, when the courts first enshrined the principle in the Bill of Rights. The section also drew attention to the rule that only Parliament can undo Acts of Parliament. I then discussed the Miller case in Section 2. In this case, members of the public argued that the government required Parliaments approval to leave the EU. The courts decided in favour of Millers side; that explained that Parliament was needed to trigger to Article 50 due to parliamentary sovereignty. The decision was controversial because some people saw it as an attempt to subvert the referendum result. Finally, Section 3 discussed the European Union Act 2017. This act that demonstrated the principle of parliamentary sovereignty. The government essentially asked Parliament for permission to trigger Article 50, and Parliament agreed by passing the act. In conclusion, the principle of parliamentary sovereignty was tested in the wake of Brexit. Ultimately however, courts respected the principle and gave Parliament the ultimate power over whether Britain should leave the EU. However, the future is still uncertain, as no-one yet knows what Brexit will look like. Perhaps a future Parliament will reverse the Brexit decision. After all, parliamentary sovereignty gives future Parliaments the right to reverse the decisions of previous Parliaments. What needs to be addressed is the potential consequneces that the referendum may have on Palimentary sovernety and represesentitive democracy throughout the UK. For this reason, Parliment needs to continue to be a central part of the process despite any predetermined preferences from the Government itself. Parliamentary sovereignty must remain intact as, for the many reasons stated, it is an integral part of the United Kingdom’s constitution, because its deliberate and representative functions and ability to hold the executive to account are defining features of the United Kingdom’s enduring constitution. 5. References Barber, N.W., 2011. The afterlife of Parliamentary sovereignty. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 9(1), pp.144–154. Barnett, H., 2017. Constitutional and administrative law, Taylor & Francis. BBC, 2017. BBC News website. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news [Accessed July 14, 2017]. Bradley, A., 2011. The Sovereignty of Parliament–Form or Substance? The Changing Constitution, 23, pp.54–56. Dicey, A.V., 1915. Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution 8th ed., Liberty Classics. EU, 2007. Treaty on European Union, Freehills, H.S., 2016. Judicial review litigation over the correct constitutional process for triggering Article 50 TEU. Lexology. Available at: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=f43e102f-ea09-4449-b781-a35ecfe628fe [Accessed July 13, 2017]. Goldsworthy, J., 2010. Parliamentary sovereignty: contemporary debates, Cambridge University Press. House of Lords, 1965. Burmah Oil Co (Burma Trading) Ltd v Lord Advocate AC 75, House of Lords, 1610. Proclamations, Case of [1610] EWHC KB J22, Available at: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/KB/1610/J22.html. Maguire, P., 2016. Seizing our sovereignty or declaring war on democracy: split view on judges’ ruling. The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/06/brexit-this-is-what-sovereignty-looks-like#img-1 [Accessed July 13, 2017]. Pannick, D., 2016. Why giving notice of withdrawal from the EU requires act of parliament. The Times. Available at: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/c8985886-3df9-11e6-a28b-4ed6c4bdada3. Parliament of England, 1689. English Bill of Rights, Supreme Court, 2016. Miller v. Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union Written case for Mr George Birnie & Others (The â€Å"Expat Interveners†), Available at: http://www.croftsolicitors.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/139459-UKSC-2016-0196-Skeleton-for-Expat-Interveners-final-written-case-2.pdf. Supreme Court, 2017. Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, London. Available at: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2016-0196-judgment.pdf. Wade, W., 1961. Administrative Law, London: Oxford University Press. Weale, A., 2017. The Democratic Duty to Oppose Brexit. The Political Quarterly, 88(2), pp.170–181. [1] BBC [2] Albert Weale, ‘The Democratic Duty to Oppose Brexit’ (2017) The Political Quarterly 177 [3] Hilaire Barnett, Constitutional and administrative law (Taylor & Francis 2017) [4] House of Lords, Case of [1610] EWHC KB J22 [5] Jeffrey Goldsworthy, Parliamentary sovereignty: contemporary debates (Cambridge University Press 2010) [6] Parliament of England, English Bill of Rights [7] Albert Dicey, Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (8th edn, Liberty Classics 1915) [8] Anthony Bradley, ‘The Sovereignty of Parliament–Form or Substance?’ (2011) The Changing Constitution 54 [9] Nicholas Barber, ‘The afterlife of Parliamentary sovereignty’ (2011) International Journal of Constitutional Law 149 [10] Supreme Court, Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [11] David Pannick, Why giving notice of withdrawal from the EU requires act of parliament [12] EU, Treaty on European Union [13] David Pannick, Why giving notice of withdrawal from the EU requires act of parliament [14] BBC [15] Herbert Smith Freehills, Judicial review litigation over the correct constitutional process for triggering Article 50 TEU [16] BBC [17] Albert Weale, ‘The Democratic Duty to Oppose Brexit’ (2017) The Political Quarterly 180 [18] Supreme Court, Miller v. Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union Written case for Mr George Birnie & Others (The â€Å"Expat Interveners†) 21 [19] Supreme Court, Miller v. Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union Written case for Mr George Birnie & Others (The â€Å"Expat Interveners†) [20] Albert Weale, ‘The Democratic Duty to Oppose Brexit’ (2017) The Political Quarterly 180 [21] Herbert Smith Freehills, Judicial review litigation over the correct constitutional process for triggering Article 50 TEU [22] Supreme Court, Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union 84 [23] Supreme Court, Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union 84 [24] Supreme Court, Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union 84 [25] Supreme Court, Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union 85 [26] House of Lords, Burmah Oil Co (Burma Trading) Ltd v Lord Advocate AC 75 101 [27] House of Lords, Burmah Oil Co (Burma Trading) Ltd v Lord Advocate AC 75 101 [28] William Wade, Administrative Law (Oxford University Press 1961) [29] Supreme Court, Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [30] Supreme Court, Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [31] Patrick Maguire, Seizing our sovereignty or declaring war on democracy: split view on judges’ ruling [32] Albert Weale, ‘The Democratic Duty to Oppose Brexit’ (2017) The Political Quarterly 174 [33] Albert Weale, ‘The Democratic Duty to Oppose Brexit’ (2017) The Political Quarterly 174 [34] Albert Dicey, Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (8th edn, Liberty Classics 1915) [35] BBC [36] BBC Parliamentary Sovereignty in the UK in the Wake of Brexit Parliamentary Sovereignty in the UK in the Wake of Brexit POn 23 June 2016, the UK government held a referendum to decide whether the country should leave the EU. The majority citizens voted for Brexit (51.89 per cent to 48.11 per cent) with a turnout of 72%, however, they thoroughly fell behind in Scottish and Northern Irish tallies. Be that as it may, the Government was still expected to trigger Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) as soon as possible, without the express permission from Parliament. The Prime Minister at the time, David Cameron, had promised that he would follow through with the outcome, even if that meant leaving the EU (BBC, 2017).[1] However, the situation was not as straightforward as presented by the â€Å"Leave† campaign. The principle of parliamentary sovereignty meant that the referendum result had no legal binding. Therefore, the Prime Minister and government were free to ignore the referendum result if they saw fit. Furthermore, some argued that the government had no right to trigger a leave; only Parliament could do so, as a result of the principle parliamentary sovereignty (Weale, 2017).[2] This paper discusses the topic of parliamentary sovereignty in the UK, particularly in the wake of Brexit, and briefly touches on some social consequences had Parliamentary Sovereignty not been respected. The structure of this paper is therefore as follows: First, Section 1 briefly discusses the history behind parliamentary sovereignty in the UK. Then, Section 2 discusses the Miller Case, a case where the High Court upheld parliamentary sovereignty in the wake of Brexit. Finally, Section 3 explores the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017, an Act of Parliament that grants the government power to leave the EU. 1. The Principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty The idea of parliamentary sovereignty was conceived circa the Case of Proclamations in 1608 (Barnett, 2017).[3] This was a court decision that reduced the power of Monarchs. Essentially, the courts decided that moving forward, Kings and Queens would have to obtain Parliament’s permission to change laws. Specifically, the Case of Proclamations stated that â€Å"the King cannot change any part of the common law [†¦.] without parliament† (House of Lords, 1610).[4] Following this, the English Civil War occurred 1642–1651, where Parliamentarians fought against Royalists for ideals such as parliamentary sovereignty. The Parliamentarians were victorious on such occasion and thus began the ‘Glorious Revolution’ in 1688, which established parliamentary sovereignty in England (Goldsworthy, 2010).[5] Then, in 1689, parliamentary sovereignty was enshrined in the Bill of Rights. Similarly to the Case of Proclamations, this bill requires Monarchs to obtain pe rmission from Parliament before changing laws. Specifically, the Bill of Rights said, â€Å"Suspending the laws or the execution of laws by regal authority without consent of Parliament is illegal† (Parliament of England, 1689).[6] In modern day Britain, Parliament consists of three main decision making bodies: the Sovereign (the monarch, i.e. the King or Queen), the House of Lords (i.e. unelected members of parliament), and the House of Commons (i.e. elected Members of Parliament, or MPs). These three bodies form the highest power in the UK. The fact that Parliament has supreme power is known as parliamentary sovereignty. In the words of Legal commentator Albert Dicey, parliamentary sovereignty gives Parliament the power â€Å"to make or unmake any law whatever† (Dicey, 1915, p.3).[7] The only limits to parliamentary sovereignty are those that Parliament sets itself (Bradley, 2011).[8] An example of this self-enforced limit is Parliament’s subordination of the UK to the EU. This came into effect in 1972, when Parliament signed the European Communities Act, under which the UK was compelled to follow EU law (Barber, 2011).[9] Parliament also has the power to lift its self-imposed limits. For exampl e, Brexit means that Parliament will repeal the European Communities Act, thus ending the EU’s control over the UK (Supreme Court, 2017).[10] It is also important to note that only Parliament can repeal Parliamentary acts. Essentially, the government and Queen cannot repeal Acts of Parliament without Parliament’s permission. 23. Parliamentary sovereignty has been a significant part of many cases and has repeatedly been called upon during cases of importance. A quote from Lord Bingham of Cornhill in R (Jackson) v Attorney General [2005] UKHL 56; [2006] 1 AC 262 at para. [9] encapsulates this significance perfectly: The bedrock of the British constitution is the supremacy of the Crown in Parliament. 2. The Miller Case Following the Brexit referendum in June 2016, Times journalist David Pannick noted that the government could not trigger Article 50 by itself; the government would have to first obtain permission from Parliament (Pannick, 2016).[11] This was because of the principle of parliamentary sovereignty. Specifically, Pannick noted that Parliament had agreed to the European Communities Act in 1972, and because only Parliament can reverse its own decisions, and therefore only Parliament can repeal the act and withdraw from the EU. He also drew attention to Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union, which says, â€Å"any member state may decide to withdraw from the union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements† (EU, 2007).[12] Pannick argued that since parliamentary sovereignty is a constitutional requirement, the EU would not accept the UK’s withdrawal without parliamentary approval (Pannick, 2016).[13] Theresa May was dismissive of these claims. She asserted that they were a tactic to delay Brexit and subvert democracy (BBC, 2017).[14] She also stated that the government did not need parliamentary approval to trigger Article 50 (Freehills, 2016).[15] Notably, Theresa May stated, â€Å"It is up to the Government to trigger Article 50 and the Government alone† (BBC, 2017).[16] Many disagreed with Theresa May, as they believed that withdrawal from the EU without Parliament’s permission would be unlawful (Weale, 2017).[17] Several members of the public felt so strongly about this that took legal action against the government. Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, or the Miller case as it was known informally, was heard in the High Court of Justice. Miller argued that Parliamentary involvement was necessary because: â€Å"By enacting the 1972 Act, Parliament surrendered aspects of its legislative sovereignty and conferred the same upon (what are now) the EU Institutions. Such conferral cannot be undone [†¦] without Parliamentary consent.† (Supreme Court, 2016, p.21)[18] In plain English, Miller’s argument was that considering Parliament surrendered power to the EU in 1972, only Parliament could take this power back (Supreme Court, 2016).[19] The government disagreed with this claim. They believed that once the UK leaves the EU, the European Communities Act 1972 would simply cease to apply, because former treaties would not exist (Supreme Court, 2016; Weale, 2017).[20] Furthermore, the government argued that they had the royal prerogative to override parliamentary sovereignty. The royal prerogative is an old power that allows governments to make decisions without Parliament, in exceptional circumstances (Freehills, 2016).[21] The government also noted a rule that â€Å"the making and unmaking of treaties is [†¦] within the competence of the government† (Supreme Court, 2017, p.84)[22] The case was debated in the High Court for several weeks until the High Court delivered its verdict on 3 November 2016. The High Court ruled in favour of Miller: the government had to obtain parliamentary authority to trigger Article 50. The High Court had agreed with Miller’s arguments about the principle of parliamentary sovereignty (Supreme Court, 2017).[23] The court explained that because of parliamentary sovereignty, only Parliament could repeal the European Communities Act. This is because only Parliament can repeal an Act of Parliament. The High Court also explained that Article 50 would nullify several rights of UK citizens (Supreme Court, 2017).[24] These rights included the right of UK citizens to live and work freely in other EU countries, and the right to 20 days paid holiday under the Working Time Directive 2003. Parliament put these rights in place when it passed the European Communities Act in 1972. The High Court also ruled against the government’s right to use the royal prerogative (Supreme Court, 2017).[25] To explain why, the High Court cited the case of Burmah Oil Co (Burma Trading) Ltd v Lord Advocate [1965] AC 75, 101. This case involved use of the royal prerogative. Lord Reid, dismissed the royal prerogative as a â€Å"relic of a past age† (House of Lords, 1965, p.101).[26] Lord Reid also explained that the royal prerogative is â€Å"only available for a case not covered by statute† (p.101).[27] Typically, the royal prerogative is only for situations such as declaring war, dissolving parliament and governing colonies (Wade, 1961).[28] So, in Miller’s case, the High Court explained that a royal prerogative was inappropriate for triggering Brexit. Therefore, the government did not have the power to trigger Article 50 without Parliament’s approval. The government was unhappy with the High Court’s decision and chose to appeal it, and as a result the case went to the Supreme Court. Ultimately, the Supreme Court dismissed the government’s appeal, citing the same reason as the High Court (Supreme Court, 2017).[29] Essentially, the court explained, the government in 1972 needed Parliament’s approval to sign the 1972 Accession Treaty. This meant that present-day government also needed Parliament’s approval to repeal this treaty (Supreme Court, 2017).[30] Of course, those in the â€Å"Leave† camp were outraged with the High Court’s decision. Like Theresa May, they believed that Parliament was attempting to obstruct the progression of Brexit. A Ukip donor accused the High Court of declaring war on British democracy (Maguire, 2016).[31] In reality, however, this was not the case; the High Court was merely upholding the British constitution as intended, by honouring the principle of parliamentary sovereignty (Weale, 2017)[32] and following the Rule of Law. Importance of the Rule of Law. On 29 March 2017, the Prime Minister wrote to the President of the European Council to notify the European Council of the United Kingdom’s intention to leave the European Unit and the triggering of Article 50 of the Treaty. Brexit is no longer a hypothetical question. It is a concrete fact – it is happening. An issue that has been brought to the front is the belief that the Government has the power, and right, to act on Brexit without Parliaments involvement. This is even more troubling as the very constitution is built upon Parliamentary sovereignty. The issue of human rights comes up as it can be dangerous, in a country where the legislature is mostly under the control of the executive, to leave it solely up to a sovereign Parliament with an absent constitution. If the Parliament can be avoided altogether, this can lead to an even worse situation overall and so highlights how important it was for the Supreme Court in Miller to stand up for and defend the power of Parliament over the executive.   Brexit is one of the most influential and far-reaching changes to the international social and political landscapes today. Brexit will shape Britain, and the international community, for years to come. It is for this reason that it is undeniable that this process should be founded in the rule of law. To comprehend the importance of the rule of law we must give it a clear definition. A well-known definition is that of Lord Bingham: â€Å"that all persons and authorities in the State, whether public or private, should be bound by and be entitled to the benefit of all laws publicly made, taking effect (generally) in the future and publicly administered in the courts.† The Venice Commission has identified the following 8 components of the rule of law: ‘(1) Accessibility of the law (that it be intelligible, clear and predictable); (2) Questions of legal right should be normally decided by law and not discretion; (3) Equality before the law; (4) Power must be exercised lawfully, fairly and reasonably; (5) Human rights must be protected; (6) Means must be provided to resolve disputes without undue cost or delay; (7) Trials must be fair, and (8) Compliance by the state with its obligations in international law as well as in national law.’ The importance of the rule of law is recognised in multiple international documents. For example, the preamble to the UN Declaration of Human Rights notes the importance of the rule of law in protecting human rights. The Treaty on European Union also couples ‘the rule of law and respect for human rights’. It is this human rights element that the remained of this short essay will focus on. Brexit will reform the social landscape of Britain and Europe. It is of paramount importance that the rule of law is respected in this reformation to ensure that fundamental rights, particularly those of minorities and vulnerable individuals, continue to be respected. This is especially true given that there has been much debate as to whether the Brexit vote was fuelled by xenophobia and racism. Research has shown that there was an increase in support for far-right groups during the Brexit campaign and following the murder of Jo Cox. There has also been an alleged escalation in hate crime targeting migrant communities as well an increase in anti-immigration rhetoric. The Brexit vote, coupled with Trump, and the rise of the far-right, summons fears surrounding the polarization of politics and the creeping rise of extremism. With this in mind, it is quite chilling to consider Lord Bingham’s thoughts on a system which is not founded on the rule of law: â€Å"The hallmark of a regime which flouts the rule of law are, alas, all too familiar: the midnight knock on the door, the sudden disappearance, the show trial, the subjection of prisoners to genetic experiments, the confession extracted by torture, the gulag and the concentration camp, the gas chamber, the practice of genocide and ethnic cleansing, the waging of aggressive wars.† In a time when international politics is becoming increasingly unclear and strained and communities are fraught with increased fear and racial tensions, now more than ever, the rule of law and the importance of Parliamentary Sovereignty must be respected. As noted by the Prime Minister, the task before the British nation is momentous but it should not be insurmountable. Britain post-Brexit has an unclear future and an undefined path. By adhering to the rule of law, the certainty, stability and protection that it provides will ensure that this difficult task is negotiated with the utmost respect for all peoples and their inalienable human rights. 3. The European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017 Given that the Supreme Court had dismissed the government’s appeal, the government now needed Parliament’s approval to trigger Article 50. In order to receive this approval, the government introduced a new bill in Parliament. This bill was called the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017.Essentially, this bill would give Theresa May the power to trigger Article 50. However, Parliament had the power to reject the bill if it felt appropriate. This was again because of parliamentary sovereignty (Weale, 2017).[33] Despite that most voters voted ‘Leave’ in the referendum, this result was not legally binding and Parliament could ignore the referendum result. The principle of parliamentary sovereignty means that the ultimate power rests with Parliament, not the public nor the results of referendums. The public only have the power to elect MPs, and once elected, MPs can go against the wishes of their constituents and make their own decisions if they want to. MPs can even go against a referendum result, despite that this might cause great anger with the British public. As Dicey stated, â€Å"the electors can in the long run always enforce their will† (Dicey, 1915).[34] However,   all three decision making bodies of Parliament – the Queen, the House of Lords and the House of Commons – approved the Notification of Withdrawal Act (BBC, 2017).[35] The Queen gave the final green flag on 16 March 2017. This gave the Prime Minister the power trigger to Article 50 and inform the EU of the UK’s withdrawal. The government officially triggered Article 50 on 29 March 2017, when a UK envoy delivered a letter of withdrawal to the President of the European Council (BBC, 2017).[36] The issue of parliamentary sovereignty then took a back seat as the UK began exit negotiations with the EU. Of the 170,000 statutory instruments that have been sent to Parliament in the last 65 years, only seventeen have been rejected, and any substantive debate over individual instruments is a rare occurrence. Responsibility has been delegated for regulation both to the government and the European Union. For this reason, possibly up to sixty per cent of UK law may be derived from EU law in some way. Furthermore, for many years, legislative and technical expertise in the pertinent areas have again been delegated to Brussels. This leaves domestic civil servants under prepared to handle the of important decisions that will need to be made in the coming years. David Allen Green’s analysis is difficult to refute: â€Å"under the cloak of the referendum result there will be a power grab by Whitehall from Westminster. Those rejoicing at â€Å"taking back control† should be careful what they wish for. The executive is, as usual, wanting to take control away from Parliament.† On many occasions, it has been asserted that because the ‘people have spoken’ through the referendum, it gives the executive the right to push onward without the consent of Parliament. On many occasions, it has been asserted that because the ‘people have spoken’ through the referendum, it gives the executive the right to push onward without the consent of Parliament. Does this mean that the claims of direct democracy, in the form of the referendum, trump the claims of Parliamentary representative democracy, with the paradoxical effect of giving more power to the executive? The greater part have affirmed that referenda are in and of themselves a product of Parliamentary authority and must accordingly rely on the statute which enables them. The 2015 EU referendum Act only called for the referendum to take place, without establishing how to approach it or the potential consequences. ‘Where, as in this case, implementation of a referendum result requires a change in the law of the land, and statute has not provided for that change, the change in the law must be made in the only way in which the UK constitution permits, namely through Parliamentary legislation.’ The actual political importance of a referendum is not subverted however. What is does assert is the basic dogma that, in a democracy, the people can speak through their representatives in Parliament. Nevertheless, direct democracy cannot be operationalised by giving undiluted power to the executive. 4. Conclusion This paper has discussed parliamentary sovereignty in the UK in the wake of Brexit. First, Section 1 introduced the concept of parliamentary sovereignty in the UK. This section explained that parliamentary sovereignty goes back to the 17th century, when the courts first enshrined the principle in the Bill of Rights. The section also drew attention to the rule that only Parliament can undo Acts of Parliament. I then discussed the Miller case in Section 2. In this case, members of the public argued that the government required Parliaments approval to leave the EU. The courts decided in favour of Millers side; that explained that Parliament was needed to trigger to Article 50 due to parliamentary sovereignty. The decision was controversial because some people saw it as an attempt to subvert the referendum result. Finally, Section 3 discussed the European Union Act 2017. This act that demonstrated the principle of parliamentary sovereignty. The government essentially asked Parliament for permission to trigger Article 50, and Parliament agreed by passing the act. In conclusion, the principle of parliamentary sovereignty was tested in the wake of Brexit. Ultimately however, courts respected the principle and gave Parliament the ultimate power over whether Britain should leave the EU. However, the future is still uncertain, as no-one yet knows what Brexit will look like. Perhaps a future Parliament will reverse the Brexit decision. After all, parliamentary sovereignty gives future Parliaments the right to reverse the decisions of previous Parliaments. What needs to be addressed is the potential consequneces that the referendum may have on Palimentary sovernety and represesentitive democracy throughout the UK. For this reason, Parliment needs to continue to be a central part of the process despite any predetermined preferences from the Government itself. Parliamentary sovereignty must remain intact as, for the many reasons stated, it is an integral part of the United Kingdom’s constitution, because its deliberate and representative functions and ability to hold the executive to account are defining features of the United Kingdom’s enduring constitution. 5. References Barber, N.W., 2011. The afterlife of Parliamentary sovereignty. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 9(1), pp.144–154. Barnett, H., 2017. Constitutional and administrative law, Taylor & Francis. BBC, 2017. BBC News website. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news [Accessed July 14, 2017]. Bradley, A., 2011. The Sovereignty of Parliament–Form or Substance? The Changing Constitution, 23, pp.54–56. Dicey, A.V., 1915. Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution 8th ed., Liberty Classics. EU, 2007. Treaty on European Union, Freehills, H.S., 2016. Judicial review litigation over the correct constitutional process for triggering Article 50 TEU. Lexology. Available at: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=f43e102f-ea09-4449-b781-a35ecfe628fe [Accessed July 13, 2017]. Goldsworthy, J., 2010. Parliamentary sovereignty: contemporary debates, Cambridge University Press. House of Lords, 1965. Burmah Oil Co (Burma Trading) Ltd v Lord Advocate AC 75, House of Lords, 1610. Proclamations, Case of [1610] EWHC KB J22, Available at: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/KB/1610/J22.html. Maguire, P., 2016. Seizing our sovereignty or declaring war on democracy: split view on judges’ ruling. The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/06/brexit-this-is-what-sovereignty-looks-like#img-1 [Accessed July 13, 2017]. Pannick, D., 2016. Why giving notice of withdrawal from the EU requires act of parliament. The Times. Available at: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/c8985886-3df9-11e6-a28b-4ed6c4bdada3. Parliament of England, 1689. English Bill of Rights, Supreme Court, 2016. Miller v. Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union Written case for Mr George Birnie & Others (The â€Å"Expat Interveners†), Available at: http://www.croftsolicitors.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/139459-UKSC-2016-0196-Skeleton-for-Expat-Interveners-final-written-case-2.pdf. Supreme Court, 2017. Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, London. Available at: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2016-0196-judgment.pdf. Wade, W., 1961. Administrative Law, London: Oxford University Press. Weale, A., 2017. The Democratic Duty to Oppose Brexit. The Political Quarterly, 88(2), pp.170–181. [1] BBC [2] Albert Weale, ‘The Democratic Duty to Oppose Brexit’ (2017) The Political Quarterly 177 [3] Hilaire Barnett, Constitutional and administrative law (Taylor & Francis 2017) [4] House of Lords, Case of [1610] EWHC KB J22 [5] Jeffrey Goldsworthy, Parliamentary sovereignty: contemporary debates (Cambridge University Press 2010) [6] Parliament of England, English Bill of Rights [7] Albert Dicey, Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (8th edn, Liberty Classics 1915) [8] Anthony Bradley, ‘The Sovereignty of Parliament–Form or Substance?’ (2011) The Changing Constitution 54 [9] Nicholas Barber, ‘The afterlife of Parliamentary sovereignty’ (2011) International Journal of Constitutional Law 149 [10] Supreme Court, Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [11] David Pannick, Why giving notice of withdrawal from the EU requires act of parliament [12] EU, Treaty on European Union [13] David Pannick, Why giving notice of withdrawal from the EU requires act of parliament [14] BBC [15] Herbert Smith Freehills, Judicial review litigation over the correct constitutional process for triggering Article 50 TEU [16] BBC [17] Albert Weale, ‘The Democratic Duty to Oppose Brexit’ (2017) The Political Quarterly 180 [18] Supreme Court, Miller v. Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union Written case for Mr George Birnie & Others (The â€Å"Expat Interveners†) 21 [19] Supreme Court, Miller v. Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union Written case for Mr George Birnie & Others (The â€Å"Expat Interveners†) [20] Albert Weale, ‘The Democratic Duty to Oppose Brexit’ (2017) The Political Quarterly 180 [21] Herbert Smith Freehills, Judicial review litigation over the correct constitutional process for triggering Article 50 TEU [22] Supreme Court, Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union 84 [23] Supreme Court, Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union 84 [24] Supreme Court, Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union 84 [25] Supreme Court, Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union 85 [26] House of Lords, Burmah Oil Co (Burma Trading) Ltd v Lord Advocate AC 75 101 [27] House of Lords, Burmah Oil Co (Burma Trading) Ltd v Lord Advocate AC 75 101 [28] William Wade, Administrative Law (Oxford University Press 1961) [29] Supreme Court, Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [30] Supreme Court, Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [31] Patrick Maguire, Seizing our sovereignty or declaring war on democracy: split view on judges’ ruling [32] Albert Weale, ‘The Democratic Duty to Oppose Brexit’ (2017) The Political Quarterly 174 [33] Albert Weale, ‘The Democratic Duty to Oppose Brexit’ (2017) The Political Quarterly 174 [34] Albert Dicey, Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (8th edn, Liberty Classics 1915) [35] BBC [36] BBC

Comparing Knowledge in Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy and H

Comparing Knowledge in Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy and Hume’s An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Rationalists would claim that knowledge comes from reason or ideas, while empiricists would answer that knowledge is derived from the senses or impressions. The difference between these two philosophical schools of thought, with respect to the distinction between ideas and impressions, can be examined in order to determine how these schools determine the source of knowledge. The distinguishing factor that determines the perspective on the foundation of knowledge is the concept of the divine. Descartes is a prime example of a rationalist. Descartes begins his Meditations on First Philosophy by doubting his senses in the first meditation. â€Å"From time to time I [Descartes] have found that the senses deceive, and it is prudent never to trust completely those who have deceived us even once†(Descartes: 12). In the second meditation, Descartes begins to rebuild the world he broke down in the first meditation by establishing cogito ergo sum with the aid of natural light. It is with this intuition that the cogito is established, from the cogito, intellect, from the intellect, knowledge; thus knowledge has been defined in this world that Descartes is constructing from scratch. Descartes uses the fact that he is a thinking thing to establish the existence of other things in the world with the cosmological and ontological arguments, as well as a meditation on truth and falsity. â€Å"So now I seem to be able to lay it down as a general rule that whatever I perceive very clearly and distinctly is true† (Descartes: 24). Descartes only utilizes his perceptions to establish ideas of the things t... ...traced back to original impressions. The source of knowledge is not a topic that is universally agreed upon. To rationalists, who usually have a sense of the divine, innate ideas give them cause to base knowledge in reason, being derived from ideas. To empiricists, who do not hold innate ideas to be valid, knowledge is unearthed through the senses, derived from observations. The presence of a concept of the divine is the deciding factor of whether knowledge originates from the senses or the ideas. Works Cited Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by Terence Irwin. Hackett Publishing Company: Indianapolis. 1985. Descartes, Rene. Meditations on First Philosophy. Translated by John Cottingham. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 1996. Hume, David. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. 2nd edition. Hackett Publishing: Indianapolis. 1993.

Personality academic career effectiveness

Where I am now? What skills have I achieved? Where do I stand in the universe in footings of employability?In the last academic twelvemonth, during my internship with Modman ‘s Royal Caf & A ; eacute ; , Lucknow ( India ) as a selling executive I gained practical accomplishments and besides it provided me with the significant value required in the workplace. I was given several different duties like developing spouse dealingss, carry oning conferences, etc. this besides included promoting and heightening the current services of the concern. During the internship I learned assorted selling constructs and theoretical accounts which helped me to analyze the market with broader position and besides facilitated me to use the theoretical cognition practically in the workplace. I worked with different people coming from all walks of life which helped me in deriving assurance and provided me with the existent universe experience. ( Refer Appendix B and Internship Certificate ) The labor market in India has become more complex than earlier and it is indispensable to possess specific accomplishments and cognition in order to last in the market. Over the class of my internship I developed a strong personal work ethic which will assist me in developing my hereafter calling ends. The ground to why I am determined that I will be able to digest because the internship allowed me to develop those accomplishments and moralss which are critical in the workplace, it provided me with comprehensive mentality and besides it has placed me in a much better place to do picks about my future calling way. Furthermore, I visited Leeds ( U.K. ) for my 3rd semester. The experience I had in the U.K. has made me more determined as an person. This gave me an penetration into my personality that I have developed my accomplishments globally.How Leeds affected me and my perceptual experiences?I learned different facets of life. My visit taught me a batch ; I have improved my accomplishments unusually. I have become more independent than earlier. During my class of survey in Leeds I had joined many societies like picture taking, composing, print devising, etc. I learned a batch during this span of clip by pass oning with different people from different civilization and backgrounds. I got an penetration into their head set that how people think. Talking on the professional line, cognizing people globally has developed my networking accomplishments and communicating manner. What I have experienced and learned from my visit is decidedly traveling to assist me in the hereafter both mentally and pro fessionally.What I am after my visit?I am know more concerned about making out and run intoing the demands of others, though I have to work harder on guaranting that I do non compromise my ain involvements at other peoples ‘ disbursal. Most significantly, I have to work on my clip direction accomplishments to make the timely and orderly completion of any given undertaking. ( Refer Appendix D ) Talking on the development perspectives, I am know a really responsible individual and have learned to prioritise things around me. This has developed and enhanced my employability accomplishments to a great extent. During the last academic twelvemonth, with the aid of assorted faculties I was able to larn different facets of the concern environment. ( Refer Appendix E )Faculty NameWhat have I learned from this faculty?How can I use these skills/knowledge to the things I do in the hereafter?Global Business ContextThis faculty helped me in understanding and researching globalisation. I learned how a concern formulates, what impacts globalisation can hold on concerns. It besides provided me with the recent constructs and model of the planetary environment.During the class of this faculty I had assorted assignments which helped in broadening my accomplishments and cognition which included the launching of a new merchandise to giving a complete item oriented analysis of the chosen state which would be favorable for making concern. Looking from a planetary position, this will decidedly assist me in increasing the possible benefits of any concern and able to function to its bottom line.Employability S killsThis faculty helped me in understanding assorted employability accomplishments required in the labor market.During the class of this faculty, I worked in a squad of 6 members each of us belong to different background, it helped me to understand and pull off diverseness. ( Refer Appendix B.1 ) I learned what difference a C.V. could make in order to happen me an appropriate occupation? Furthermore, I along with other squad members ran an appraisal Centre through which I was able to larn how to interview and besides how to acquire interviewed. From a future position, this will assist me in understanding the needed employability accomplishments in the planetary labor market.Business Analysis and patternThis faculty helped me in groking what is concern? This included strategizing, determination devising, managing the fundss of a company, selling of the merchandise, effectual reading of the information. It besides involved an extended research and seting the research into a program.D uring the class of this faculty, I along with 5 other members worked in a squad. This integrated set uping an car company, from giving a trade name name to the company to its strategizing. I was the pull offing manager of the company, this gave me an penetration into a concern, and I developed my acumen throughout the working of the program. Besides, it helped me to develop my leading skills unusually. ( Refer Appendix C.1 and B.3 ) . What I learned from this faculty will decidedly assist me to per se understand the planetary labor market and client perceptual experiences in any concern.Human resource ManagementThis faculty helped me in understanding the function of HRM and how to use assorted HR policies in an administration maintaining in head the critical apprehension of demands and wants of the employees. ( Refer Appendix C.3 )During the class of this faculty, I learned what HR policies are and how it can impact an administration in both negative and positive ways. This included the declarations to be provided for the given instance survey and using the HR policies by supplying them with feasible recommendations and their possible benefits. This will decidedly assist me in future to move as a HR analyst and supply any concern with executable recommendations which will turn out to be productive.Operationss ManagementThis faculty helped me in developing the ability to understand assorted operations performed in an administration and selectively use operation direction constructs to assorted administrations to better operational public presentation.During the class of this faculty, I learned assorted properties of measuring an administrations operational activity. This involved an person based multimedia instance survey which helped me to grok and analyze assorted operational activity of an administration by supplying them with executable recommendations in order to better the public presentation. From a future position, this will assist me in developing and measuring the operational activity of any concern and therefore bettering the operational public presentation.Pull offing Workplace DiversityThis faculty helped me in understanding the construct behind pull offing diverseness.During the class of this faculty, I learned assorted positions related to diverseness and their positive or negative impact on the concern. It included an person based item oriented analysis speaking about the favoritism in the workplace and what possible policy measures a company should integrate in order to win as a concern. From a future position point, this will assist me to understand assorted diverseness issues predominating in an administration and how I can work to do administration diverseness positive in order to derive upper limit from the employees.Business Decision MakingThis faculty helped me to develop an apprehension of psychological, behavioral and systems positions of determination devising in an administration and promote an analytical and sy stematic attack to determination devising.During the class of this faculty. I along with 5 other members worked in a group to analyze and place the given issues in the instance survey and provided with executable recommendations with their hereafter benefits. I developed my teamwork and managing accomplishments during this appraisal. ( Refer Appendix C.2 ) Teacher ‘s reported on my teamwork and public presentation that I have the strength of acquiring along with people holding different positions towards life. This along with managing and taking a squad, I believe will represent my invaluable strengths sing the alteration which is required in today ‘s universe and do a difference in whatever I do.Why I think that what I learned from these faculties and other experiences will assist in the hereafter?India being an emerging economic system, occupations are increasing twenty-four hours by twenty-four hours. We are all cognizant that late skills development has become one of the top precedences of our state. In the present scenario, employers are besides cognizant about the employability accomplishments required for a peculiar place. The grounds to why I think that I have improved my employability accomplishments are the faculties and the experience ( U.K. ) from which I have learned a batch in the last academic twelvemonth. Though there is a room for more development, but the faculties helped me in understanding and analyzing my ain abilities through which I have improved my soft accomplishments which play a critical function in the present planetary environment. So this is why I strongly believe, what I learned has made me more & A ; lsquo ; employable ‘ than before non merely in the Indian labor market but all over the universe.

Group Brand Audit Project Essay

Your group assignment is to pick a brand from the list of brands(attached) and conduct a thorough brand audit. Each group must study and analyze a different brand. Brands will be assigned on a â€Å"first come, first serve† basis. Post your group’s choice of brand and gp number on the â€Å"questions for Prof/TA† board so that everyone can see your group’s choice. This way, the other gps will know which brands are already taken on a first come first serve basis. Once your gp posts a Brand choice (that is not already taken)- it’s yours. The brand audit analysis will be based on information from public secondary sources, company web sites, as well as your own professional experiences and insights. Surveys or primary research are not required but can certainly be conducted and used as needed. The final Powerpoint report should be submitted using the assignment link on elearning. The length of the Brand Audit report should be approx. 30-40 ppt slides (not including any appendices or references). Typically a thorough audit requires 30-40 hours of work which divided among 6 or 7 gp members usually amounts to an average of about 5-6 hrs of work per student. The following format and guideline will help streamline the approach and the process. A tentative example is available for you to review on page 132 of the textbook. This Rolex example is only that†¦an example†¦just a very brief and concise example. I. Brand Inventory A current, comprehensive profile of how all products and services sold by a company are marketed and branded. Read Also: List of Exploratory Essay Topics This is mainly the supply-side view of the company and the brand. Should include (but not limited to): History of the brand Identification of all brand elements (logos, symbols, characters, packaging, slogans, trademarks). Brand architecture. Description of attributes of the product/idea/service. Profile of direct and indirect competitive brands (use points of parity and points of difference). Include market share and other relevant facts and figures. ‘Brand Architecture’ and ‘Hierarchy’ and ‘brand product matrix’ (where applicable). Pricing, profitability and market share of the brand. Distribution channels and policies. Supporting marketing communications/promotional programs. Brand personality as reflected by the brand elements and existing marketing mix. 1 II. Brand Exploratory This is usually the more challenging research and analytical component of this assignment. Actual consumer perceptions may or may not reflect those intended by the marketer. The Brand exploratory is aimed at understanding what consumers feel and think about the brand in order to identify sources of brand equity. Should include (but not limited to): Customer knowledge of the brand (include â€Å"Brand Mental Map†). Brand Associations: awareness, strength, favorability, consistency and uniqueness of brand associations. Main sources of Brand Equity (possible threats to Brand Equity) Customer-Based Brand Equity Pyramid (CBBE pyramid) Problem areas/inconsistencies of perception vs. market reality. The size, profile and buying behavior of the most important customer segments. The depth and breath of ‘Brand Awareness’. A perceptual map showing the brand and its main competitors along the most important brand attributes. III. Conclusion & Recommendations: Should include (but not limited to): SWOT analysis. A proposal for a ‘positioning’ statement. Recommendations concerning how to measure, build and manage additional Brand Equity. IV. Appendix: Supporting/additional Tables, Charts, Graphs, Figures, Photos, etc. V. References: List only the material that you actually refer to in the report. Choose from this list of Brands (most of them from Business Week’s 100 Best Global Brands) Post your gp’s choice on the â€Å"Ques for Prof/TA† board on a first come first serve basis.

Free Essays on Racisim In Friday Night Lights

On July 2, 1964 Lynden B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This act prohibited discrimination in most public places, deemed discrimination in employment based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin illegal, and allowed the Justice Department to institute suits to desegregate public schools and other facilities. In Odessa, Texas, it was seen as a pain to enforce, and was just another attempt of the federal government to meddle in places where they should not meddle. In 1988, although there were no hate crimes against blacks, whites and blacks were certainly not very friendly. In everyday speech, the residents frequently use the term nigger to describe various things such as the appearance of a person. In addition, blacks and other minorities were forced to live below the tracks and attend their children were made to attend a separate school from the rest of the city’s children. Racism is the ideology that maintains one race is inherently superior to another (Beach 2003:444). In Odessa, Texas no one believed they were doing anything wrong by suppressing the rights of minorities. It was thought that it was the way things were supposed to be. Whites were allowed to attend the school of their choice, swim where they pleased, and shop wherever. However, minorities had to attend Ector High School, and if they even attempted to stick a toe into the white pool, it was shut down. Racism is an integral part of the society of Odessa. A person skin color determined which side of the tracks he or she lived on, what school they went to, what job they had, and where they shopped. The separation caused some people living in the white section of town to rarely ever see a person of another race. In conclusion, in Friday Night Lights by H.G. Bissinger, the residents of Odessa, Texas built their society deeply rooted in the belief that white and other groups should not mix. This belief is displayed in their refusal to integrat... Free Essays on Racisim In Friday Night Lights Free Essays on Racisim In Friday Night Lights On July 2, 1964 Lynden B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This act prohibited discrimination in most public places, deemed discrimination in employment based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin illegal, and allowed the Justice Department to institute suits to desegregate public schools and other facilities. In Odessa, Texas, it was seen as a pain to enforce, and was just another attempt of the federal government to meddle in places where they should not meddle. In 1988, although there were no hate crimes against blacks, whites and blacks were certainly not very friendly. In everyday speech, the residents frequently use the term nigger to describe various things such as the appearance of a person. In addition, blacks and other minorities were forced to live below the tracks and attend their children were made to attend a separate school from the rest of the city’s children. Racism is the ideology that maintains one race is inherently superior to another (Beach 2003:444). In Odessa, Texas no one believed they were doing anything wrong by suppressing the rights of minorities. It was thought that it was the way things were supposed to be. Whites were allowed to attend the school of their choice, swim where they pleased, and shop wherever. However, minorities had to attend Ector High School, and if they even attempted to stick a toe into the white pool, it was shut down. Racism is an integral part of the society of Odessa. A person skin color determined which side of the tracks he or she lived on, what school they went to, what job they had, and where they shopped. The separation caused some people living in the white section of town to rarely ever see a person of another race. In conclusion, in Friday Night Lights by H.G. Bissinger, the residents of Odessa, Texas built their society deeply rooted in the belief that white and other groups should not mix. This belief is displayed in their refusal to integrat...

Mahatma Gandhi Research Paper Example

Mahatma Gandhi Research Paper Example Mahatma Gandhi Paper Mahatma Gandhi Paper Essay on Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi commonly known as Mahatma Gandhi or Bapu (Father of Nation), was the preeminent leader of Indian nationalism in British-ruled India. Employing non-violent civil disobedience, Gandhi led India to independence and inspired movements for non-violence, civil rights, and freedom across the The son of a senior government official, Gandhi was born and raised in a Bania[4] community In coastal Gujarat, and trained In law In London. Gandhi became famous by fighting for the clvll rights of Muslim and Hindu Indians In South Africa, using new techniques of non-violent clvll disobedience that he developed. Returning to India In 191 5, he set about organlslng peasants to protest excessive land-taxes. A lifelong opponent of â€Å"communalism† (I. e. basing polltlcs on rellglon) he reached out widely to all rellglous groups. He became a leader of Muslims protesting the declining status of the Caliphate. Assuming leadership of the Indian National Congress in 1921, Gandhi led nationwide campaigns for easing poverty, expanding women’s rights, building religious and ethnic amity, ndinguntouchability, increasing economic self-reliance, and above all for achieving Swaraj †the independence of India from British domination. Gandhi led Indians in protesting the national salt tax with the 400 km (250 mi) Dandi Salt March in 1 930, and later in demanding the British to immediately Quit India in 1942, during World War II. He was imprisoned for that and for numerous other political offences over the years. Gandhi sought to practice non-violence and truth in all situations, and advocated that others do the same. He saw the villages as the core of the true India and promoted self-sufficiency; he did not support the industrialisation programs of his discipleJawaharlal Nehru. He lived modestly in a self-sufficient residential community and wore the traditional Indian dhoti and shawl, woven with yarn he had hand spun on a charkha. His chief political enemy in Britain was Winston who ridiculed him as a â€Å"half-naked fakir†. 6] He was a dedicated vegetarian, and undertook long fasts as means of both self-purification and political mobilisation. In his last year, unhappy at the partition of India, Gandhi worked to stop the carnage between Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs that raged in the border area between India and Pakistan. He was assassinated on 30 January 1948 by Nathuram Godse who thought Gandhi was too sympathetic to India’s Muslims. 30 January Is observed as Martyrs’ Day in India. The honorific Mahatma (â€Å"Great Soul†) was applied to him by 1914. [7] In India he was also called Bapu (â€Å"Father†). He Is known In India as the Father of the his birthday, 2 October, Is commemorated there s Gandhi Jayantl, a national holiday, and world-wide as the International Day of Non- Violence. Gandhi’s philosophy was not theoretical but one of pragmatism, that Is, practlslng his principles In the moment. Asked to give a message to the people, he would respond, â€Å"My life is my message BY vjshalRaJ1 freedom across the world. The son of a senior government official, Gandhi was born and raised in a Bania[4] community in coastal Gujarat, and trained in law in London. Gandhi became famous by fghting for the civil rights of Muslim and Hindu Indians in South Africa, using new techniques of non-violent civil disobedience that he developed. Returning to India in 1915, he set about organising peasants to protest excessive land-taxes. A lifelong opponent of â€Å"communalism† (i. e. basing politics on religion) he reached out widely to all religious groups. He became a leader of achieving SwaraJ †the independence of India from British domination. Gandhi led March in 1930, and later in demanding the British to immediately Quit India in 1942, Churchill,[5] who ridiculed him as a â€Å"half-naked fakir†. ] He was a dedicated Godse who thought Gandhi was too sympathetic to India’s Muslims. 30 January is to him by 1914. [7] In India he was also called Bapu (â€Å"Father†). He is known in India as the Father of the Nation;[8] his birthday, 2 October, is commemorated there as Gandhi Jayanti, a national holiday, and world-wide as the International Day of Non- Violence.

A nuture theory of human behavior

A nuture theory of human behavior The nature versus nurture debate is one of the most convoluted in the field of psychology. In the 17th century, a French philosopher, Renà © Descartes posited that â€Å"we all, as individual human beings, have certain innate ideas that enduringly underpin our approach to the world† (Crawford, 1989 p 64). The use of the terms â€Å"nature† and â€Å"nurture† henceforth has referred to the roles of heredity and environment respectively in human development. Some scientists believe that human beings behave as they do in response to genetic predisposition. This is known as the nature theory of human behavior and is the view espoused by naturalists (Scott, 1995). Other scientists think otherwise; that people think and behave in certain ways because they are taught to do so. This is known as nurture theory of human behavior and is the view of empiricists. Presented in the paper are the theories of nature vs. nurture, elucidation of perception, intelligence and perso nality within the debate. In addition, the paper discusses eevidences in favor of nurture and the influence of environment on behavior and morality. In exploring the nature versus the nurture debate, the writer presumes that nature endows human beings with inborn abilities and traits while nurture takes these genetic tendencies and molds them as humans learn and mature. Theories of Nature vs. Nurture According to naturalists, personality is natural. This group believes that personality is a result of evolutionary process. Human beings, it believes, inherit behaviors due to a complex interaction of genes. As such, genes control their behaviors. They believe that form and characteristics measured with personality tests remain stable throughout human life. They further believe that human beings may sharpen their types or personality but can never change them altogether. Darwin’s Theory of Evolution led naturalists such as George Williams, William Hamilton, and many others to the idea of personality evolution. They proposed that physical organs and personality is a result of natural selection (Herschkowitz, 2002). Human beings do as their genes dictate. In support, Steven Pinker (2004) includes conservativeness, religiousness and liberalism as gene related traits. William Paley, in agreement, believes cognitive capabilities, temperaments, and cheating behaviors are inheritable. There are however various assumptions about nature. Evolutionary psychologists believe that behaviour is a result of natural selection in the environment of evolutionary adaptation (EEA). Interpersonal attraction therefore can be explained as a consequence of sexual selection – men and women select partners who enhance their reproductive success (Crawford, 1989). Arguments for the supremacy of nurture posit that personality is nurtured. This group argues that one does not get personality from inheritance. They argue that the mind is a blank slate at birth. The definition of nu rture has extended to influence of development that emanates from prenatal, parental, peer influence and extending to the role of media, marketing and socio-economic status (Scott, 1995). They dispute that types and characteristics measured with personality tests change incessantly throughout one’s life. Harvard psychologist B. F. Skinner’s, experiments, produced birds that could dance and play tennis. Today, known as the father of behavioral science, Skinner ultimately went on to prove that human behavior could be conditioned in much the same way as animals. If environment did not play a part in determining an individual’s traits and behaviors, then identical twins should be the same in all respects, even if reared apart. However, a number of studies show that they are never exactly alike, even though they are remarkably similar in most respects (Michaels, 2001).

The Individual and Society Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

The Individual and Society - Essay Example The individual has violated a type of social norm referred to as injunctive norm. Injunctive norms commonly refer to what is approved or disapproved by the culture, and they encourage behavior through the informal social sanctions. In other words, injunctive refer to the perceptions of what it is supposed to be done (De Cremer, Murnighan and Van Dick 69). For example, the individual has violated of what it is perceived to be done, not to litter the environment. The society in general, requires that the environment is kept clean and the incidences of littering are considered to be against the social norms. Thus, the individual has violated the social norms that require the environment to be kept clean. In USA, there are several organizations and interest groups that have taken the initiative of keeping the environment clean through methods such as litter prevention. Keep America Beautiful, Inc. (par. 6) asserts that littering is a personal choice. In other words, it is an individual behavior to choose to litter on the ground. 83 percent of the litter is disposed properly meaning that most people hold the notion that littering in the wrong places is not good. Thus, litter prevention is a social norm that is accepted by most people living in the USA. It will not be proper for an individual to litter in the wrong places in USA. As stated earlier, choosing to litter (that is, to litter on the ground) is an individual behavior. According to Keep America Beautiful, Inc. (par. 6), 81 percent of individuals litter intentionally; through methods such as flinging, dropping or flicking. It further states that individuals tend to litter in environments already littered. Some of the individuals believe that litter prevention is not their responsibility. These people lack sense of ownership for beaches, walkways, parks and other public places. They believe that someone will pick

DQ 4 Secondary Research Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

DQ 4 Secondary Research - Essay Example Misleading - Secondary data is often misleading for the researcher as it is that this data had been collected for another purpose. It is merely the interpretation of primary data. The researcher should look from this point of view to understand the difference. Non-updated - Secondary data is collected from old sources. Therefore there sources may not be applicable for current needs. The researcher should check the date and time of publishing to find if the research still applicable or not. Difference in units of measurement - A researcher may mistakenly use the secondary research in his/her own units of measurement without realizing that they were in different units. The researcher should convert the units into the ones that he/she requires. Accuracy - The quality of secondary data depends on who had collected the data and how it was collected. The researcher has to be sure of the accuracy of the data before using it. Therefore the researcher should use renowned sources only to maintain the accuracy of the research. Costly - If secondary data is taken from corporate libraries or archives, the researcher would have to spend hefty sums to gain access to such libraries and archives. Non-paid websites and other sources can be used however authenticity and reliability must also be checked for. UWB is trying to launch a new product and for that purpose it hired a

The Future of Public Relation Jobs Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

The Future of Public Relation Jobs - Essay Example y their stories directly to the audience. Let’s talk PR by Kera Cottingham This article that illustrates the future of public relation jobs argues that the personality, charming nature, and the integration of ones talent, uniqueness, being eloquent as well as endurance to various factors play a big role for the success of public relations ( Kera,2012).All these qualities need to be blended for the success of public relation. The greatest challenge is the blending of these virtues which is leading to the diminishing of public relation jobs, it goes beyond one imagination and one has to be very innovative in order to succeed in this field. Publicity mostly in this industry plays a vital role for ones success. For example, Oprah Winfrey one of the most sought after public relation figures laid down a number of lessons that many people followed leading to their success in their careers. Some of the lessons included the issue of being transparent as well as the aspect of telling th e truth about oneself. Another aspect is the issue of being fully knowledgeable towards the issues you are addressing besides being innovative. Innovativeness tops this list because it is one element that people embrace making it possible to analyze the situations in place. The Future of Public Relations in Higher Education by Georgy Cohen According to this article, the future of public relations jobs is advancing in line with the technological advancements. In addition, the emergence of online blogs as this article illustrates allows some of the public relations departments and firms to extract information regarding the public opinion on some issues which they might have not gained access to or had no prior information about (Georgy, 2011). The development of software for example Bacons media map, allows the public relation professionals and firms to gather immediate, first hand information for their editorial and reporters globally. In terms of the financial changes implementation in the field of public relations, most firms are campaigning for public relation professions to be licensed, an issue that was supported by a famous practitioner Edward Bernays. One of the key aspects covered by this article is on billing issue, whereby individuals felt that the professional billing should be put in place to replace the traditional billing per hour. For instance, quite a number of the UK public relation companies are implementing a more effective the system provided a client has a price upfront on a one time payment schedule. For example, a client may be billed for $ 1,500 for a two-hour period of consultation,$300 for a press briefings or $750 for a press conference. Strategic leadership in public relations: An integrated conceptual framework by Juan Meng This article depicts that the necessity aspect of many corporations toward the essence of Public relation in the business fraternity has evolved a new approach towards the use of the public relation to campaign f or various issues for instance healthcare, aids among other issues. This article argues that the public relati

Serial killers Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Serial killers - Research Paper Example The paper details a literature review of serial killers and an overview on prevention and control strategies for the problem of serial killers. The paper recognizes the centrality of the premise that a serial murderers acts mirror a psychological problem from which patterns can be derived. The psychological assessment of crime scene is pertinent to the development of a profile. The paper concludes the dependence on narrow definitions; creation of typologies based on the outlined definitions, and questionable data gathering may impede or distort the analysis of serial killers. Part I Introduction Empirical evidence indicates that roughly 20% of the murders within the United States yearly may be perpetrated by serial killers; nevertheless, other data sources challenge that the share of serial killers accounted for no more than 300-400 murders every year. A typology of serial killers features: visionary serial killer, who feel impelled to perpetrate murders by visions; mission oriented killer who perceive that it to be their mission in life to kill certain forms of people; hedonistic serial killer who kill for the pure adventure and joy of it; and, power/control killer who derives more satisfaction from exercising absolute power over his or her victims, and sexual activity  may be  involved. ... The question on what makes a serial killer remain widely debated in academic circles. Some people argue that serial killers  may be  genetically pre-disposed while others think that such behavior emanates from dysfunctional environments. Researchers estimate that 60% of what makes an individual a serial killer is biological while the remaining 40% can be linked to the environment. In the 1960s, J. M. MacDonald, psychologists, highlighted that a majority of future serial killers manifested warning signs during childhood including excessive cruelty to animals, as well as bed-wetting during childhood (Muller, 2000). Furthermore, majority of the serial killers manifest wild fantasies on murder from childhood into adulthood and have a demeanor typified by -self-esteem and experiences of sexual dysfunction. Theoretical background Researchers have instituted methods to profile serial killers, as well as other violent offenders via extensive interviewing and formal psychological testing of known killers. In the U.S., African Americans are over-represented among serial killer compared to their proportion of the American population. Some people argue that African Americans serial killers fail to attain the notoriety of their white counterparts since the media tends to overlook them. Females usually kill for instrument reasons or out of twisted notions of mercy (Mitchell & Aamodt, 2005). Some of the questionable assumptions that drive research in serial killer encompass notions that serial killers are male, notion that killings are not essentially for profit, the notion that victims are stranger, and the notion that the victims are powerless. Serial

Critical Review of Communicative Learning in teaching methodology Essay

Critical Review of Communicative Learning in teaching methodology - Essay Example Communicative language teaching is critically reviewed. With an emphasis on understanding its basic tenets and the advantages that it offers to the language learning process. Communicative language teaching is an approach towards language teaching. It is entrenched in the belief that the primary purpose of language is communication (Brandl, 2008). Therefore, the approach aims to equip its learners with an ability to communicate. There are two categories of the communicative approach. The weak component involves an overt pedagogy of language forms that develops the learner’s ability to use the same for communication. The strong communicative approach on the other hand inclines towards furnishing the learner with experiences through which the learner develops proficiency in the use the language. According to Richards, there are four principles through which the approach can be understood (2005). These are: the mode of learning of a language, the goals of teaching language, the types of classroom activities that promote learning, and what the roles of teachers and learners are in the classroom. The communicative approach is therefore a broad one that encompasses a wide range of activities which are meant to improve the overall language acquisition process. It is also referred to as the functional approach or the notional-functional approach (Richards & Rodgers, 2001). The end result is learner’s achieving communicative competence. The communicative approach developed as an alternative to the grammar-translation method. This previous approach indulged learners in a frenzy of vocabulary and rule grasping, with the outcome being a limited oral proficiency (Brandl, 2008). In order to atone for this shortcoming, the students would then travel to the language’s country of origin so as to acquaint themselves through practice. Owing to this significant