Is Torture justified free essay sample

What is torture? Basically, this is the action of physically or psychologically hurting a person without their permission and against their will. The torture has many goals such as obtaining a confession or information of the victim, revenge for an act committed by the victim or just for entertainment morbid and sadistic of the torturer. According to the 1984 United Nations Convention against Torture, the torture is: â€Å"any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. We will write a custom essay sample on Is Torture justified? or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions. † Torture is not acceptable because it is degrading and ethically wrong, but under certain circumstances torture can be justified. Torture is justifiable if lives of innocent people are in risk or if an entire nation is in danger. First of all torture is justifiable when the lives of innocent people are in danger of being injured by violent motives. For example, in the scenario that a terrorist put a ticking time bomb in a public place like the case of a shopping center, a park, a hospital, a stadium, etc. This person is the only one who can give a clue as how, when and where the attack will happen, so it is definitely better sacrifices the human rights of a single person who is doing evil, for it can save the lives of hundreds of innocent people. Another example, in the scenario of a murderer or rapist who uses torture for sadistic and morbid motives, and he has prisoners and assuming that the police caught him, and this person does not want willingly confess the crimes committed and the location of these people. Then, the morals and ethics of society should be left aside and act promptly to extract the information needed to save these people from suffering provided by the torturer. According to Mirko Bagaric claims that torture is morally justified in order to save the lives of innocent people. He is confident that torture gives reliable information that can prevent terrorist attacks. According to the author, torture is a way to avoid killing innocent people. He claims that torture should never be used for punishment and domination, but it has different considerations when used for humane reasons such as saving lives. In one part of his article says, â€Å"Killing Innocent People Worse than Torture; Paradoxically, people who propose an absolute ban on torture arent sufficiently repulsed by torture and are too willing to accept the murder of innocent people: either they lack compassion or have a warped moral compass. Torture is bad. Killing innocent people is worse. Some people are so depraved that they combine these evils and torture innocent people to death. † Mirko Babaric is certain that torture is not cruel if it is motivated by a compassionate desire to avoid a tragedy, and it gets a greater good. He made a refutation to the people who are against torture. He said, â€Å"There could be nothing more inhumane than doing nothing as innocent people are being tortured to death. † Torture used to save the life of another person is acceptable. In another article clearly shows a real example of how the torture served to save the life of a human being. â€Å"In June 1979 Jean Leon and an accomplice kidnapped Miami cab driver Louis Gachelin, held him at gunpoint, and demanded a seven-thousand-dollar ransom from his family. Police officers quickly captured Leon, but Gachelin was not with him. Concerned that Gachelin might be murdered once Leons absence was noticed by his accomplice, seven police officers made a radical decision: To find out where Gachelin was being held, they beat the information out of Leon. The kidnapper caved in, and Gachelin was rescued. His life had arguably been saved by the use of torture. † The author also shows how torture has been used since human civilization from The Code of Hammurabi , 1750 BC to the present day with the intention to punish or to get information, even in some parts of the world are still cases of torture as way of punishment or conviction, but this is not the case of the Americans because they do not supporter torture as a punishment, and it is established on the Eighth Amendment which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. nevertheless, the torture can be used in cases like Gachelin, where this serves as an interrogation technique to save the life of a person. Since The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, U. S. has been focused on how to prevent similar situations happen in the future. For this reason, some Americans have suggested the use of torture to obtain the desired information. The author notes that U. S. government has experimented with new techniques of interrogation without violating international human rights; those are as known stress and duress techniques, which consist of exposing prisoners to isolation, darkness, blindfolding, discomfort (such as being forced to stand in one position for four hours), forced nudity, and unpleasant food. These tactics are designed to demoralize prisoners so that they will provide information, and they have been met with much controversy over the legality and morality of their application. Those in favor of using the intensified techniques argue that the information extracted from stressed prisoners might save hundreds of lives. † The ticking time bomb is a very common scenario for those who support the use of torture. Supporters of the time bomb hypothesis believe that enhanced interrogation techniques are justified to obtain information from suspects to avoid massive loss of life. Although Americans have probably never faced a real time bomb scenario, many of them are familiar with the concept and are aware of the various means of torture that could be used to obtain the necessary information, and all this because a TV series called 24. This show is directed, produced and acted by Kiefer Sutherland as Jack Bauer, whose job is to prevent terrorist attacks against the United States. According to Human Rights, before September 11, 2001, there were four or fewer cases of torture on television each year. In 2009, more than 100 cases were reported acts of torture that appear on TV. According to David Danzig Human Rights, he said, It used to be almost exclusively the villains who tortured. Nowadays, torture is often perpetrated by the heroes, even though torture is illegal under the law U. S. and internationally. † Is Torture justified? The show 24 shows a simplified representation of the difficulty and complexity of the policy issues and definitions of torture facing the government of the United States. The opposite side says that Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatments are like slavery and genocide, and they are always unacceptable. This principle has been established for many years and is enshrined in international law. â€Å"Everyone has the right to freedom from torture and inhuman or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. † It is Accordance with Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They get three main arguments against the authorization of torture. First, it is the argument of art slippery slope this means that allowing torture in a limited context there may encourage more of these cases. Nonetheless, this argument does not work for the concept of torture because it is already used even though it is universally prohibited, according to reports Amnesty International reported cases of torture and ill-treatment in 132 countries in 2003, including the United States, Japan and France. The second argument is that torture makes it lose its human sense to the society. Nevertheless, a society that chooses to defend the rights of those who do evil on innocent people instead of defending innocent people, in that case the society needs to make an urgent moral and ethical change to see things more humanely. Finally, people cannot be absolutely certain that torturing someone gives us the result of saving the life of another person. However, it is a decision of self defense. In conclusion, the only way the torture is justified. There is when existed a threat to the lives of innocent people or finding a greater good for humanity. For example, a terrorist attack when is in danger the lives of hundreds of innocent people or in the case of murderers, rapists and kidnappers who has prisoners. keep in mind that torture can only be used as an information extraction technique because it is not acceptable as a punishment based on religious, political and social belief. Definitely, Torture is acceptable when used for the greater good of humanity to preserve the lives of innocent people.

History and Facts About Alcatraz Prison

History and Facts About Alcatraz Prison Once considered the prison of American prisons, the island of Alcatraz in San Francisco Bay has been an asset to the U.S. Army, the federal prison system, jailhouse folklore, and the historical evolution of the West Coast. Despite its reputation as a cold and unforgiving penitentiary, Alcatraz is now one of the most prominent tourist magnets in San Francisco. In 1775, Spanish explorer Juan Manuel de Ayala chartered what is now San Francisco Bay. He called the 22-acre rocky island La Isla de los Alcatraces, meaning Island of the Pelicans. With no vegetation or habitation, Alcatraz was little more than a desolate islet occupied by the occasional swarm of birds. Under the English-speaking influence, the name Alcatraces became Alcatraz. Fort Alcatraz Alcatraz was reserved for military use under President Millard Fillmore in 1850. Meanwhile, the discovery of gold in the Sierra Nevada Mountains brought growth and prosperity to San Francisco. The lure of the Gold Rush demanded the protection of California as gold seekers flooded the San Francisco Bay. In response, the U.S. Army built a fortress on the rocky face of Alcatraz. They made plans to install more than 100 cannons, making Alcatraz the most heavily armed entity on the West Coast. The first functional lighthouse on the West Coast was built on Alcatraz Island as well. Once fully equipped with weaponry in 1859, the island was deemed Fort Alcatraz. Having never fired its own weapons in combat, Fort Alcatraz quickly evolved from an island of defense to an island of detention. In the early 1860s, civilians arrested for treason during the Civil War were housed on the island. With the influx of prisoners, additional living quarters were built to house 500 men. Alcatraz as a jail would continue for 100 years. Throughout history, the average population of the island hovered between 200 and 300 people, never at maximum capacity. The Rock After the devastating San Francisco earthquake of 1906, inmates from nearby prisons were transferred to the infallible Alcatraz. Over the next five years, prisoners built a new jail, designated Pacific Branch, U.S. Military Prison, Alcatraz Island. Popularly known as The Rock, Alcatraz served as an army disciplinary barracks until 1933. Prisoners were educated and received military and vocational training here. Alcatraz of the early 20th century was a minimum-security prison. Prisoners spent their days working and learning. Some were even employed as babysitters for the families of prison officers. They eventually built a baseball field and inmates fashioned their own baseball uniforms. Boxing matches among inmates known as â€Å"Alcatraz Fights† were hosted on Friday nights. Prison life played a role in the changing landscape of the island. The military transported soil to Alcatraz from nearby Angel Island, and many prisoners were trained as gardeners. They planted roses, bluegrass, poppies, and lilies. Under the order of the U.S. Army, Alcatraz was a fairly mild institution and its accommodations were favorable. The geographic location of Alcatraz was the undoing of U.S. Army occupation. Importing food and supplies to the island was much too expensive. The Great Depression of the 1930s forced the army off the island, and the prisoners were transferred to institutes in Kansas and New Jersey. Uncle Sam’s Devil’s Island Alcatraz was obtained by the Federal Bureau of Prisons in 1934. The former military detention center became America’s first maximum-security civilian penitentiary. This â€Å"prison system’s prison† was specifically designed to house the most horrendous prisoners, the troublemakers that other federal prisons could not successfully detain. Its isolated location made it ideal for the exile of hardened criminals, and a strict daily routine taught inmates to follow prison rule and regulation. The Great Depression witnessed some of the most heinous criminal activity in modern American history, and Alcatraz’s severity was well suited to its time. Alcatraz was home to notorious criminals including Al â€Å"Scarface† Capone, who was convicted of tax evasion and spent five years on the island. Alvin â€Å"Creepy† Karpis, the FBI’s first â€Å"Public Enemy,† was a 28-year resident of Alcatraz. The most famous prisoner was Alaskan murderer Robert â€Å"Birdman† Stroud, who spent 17 years on Alcatraz. Over its 29 years of operation, the federal prison housed more than 1,500 convicts. Daily life in the Alcatraz Federal Penitentiary was harsh. Prisoners were given four rights. They included medical attention, shelter, food, and clothing. Recreational activities and family visits had to be earned through hard work. Punishments for bad behavior included hard labor, wearing a 12-pound ball and chain, and lock-downs where prisoners were kept in solitary confinement, restricted to bread and water. There was a total of 14 escape attempts by over 30 prisoners. Most were caught, several were shot, and a few were swallowed by the chilling swells of the San Francisco Bay. Why Did Alcatraz Close? The prison on Alcatraz Island was expensive to operate, as all supplies had to be brought in by boat. The island had no source of fresh water, and almost one million gallons were shipped in each week. Building a high-security prison elsewhere was more affordable for the Federal Government, and as of 1963 â€Å"Uncle Sam’s Devil’s Island† was no more. Today, the equivalent of the infamous federal prison on Alcatraz Island is a maximum-security institution in Florence, Colorado. It is nicknamed â€Å"Alcatraz of the Rockies†. Tourism Alcatraz Island became a national park in 1972 and is considered part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. Open to the public in 1973, Alcatraz sees more than one million visitors from across the globe each year. Alcatraz is best known as a maximum-security prison. Media attention and fantastic stories have exaggerated this image. The San Francisco Bay islet has been much more than this. Alcatraz as a mass of rock named for its birds, an American fort during the Gold Rush, an army barracks, and tourist attraction may be less enticing but allude to a more dynamic existence. It is one to be embraced by San Francisco and California as a whole.

Rise and Fall of Napoleon Bonaparte Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Rise and Fall of Napoleon Bonaparte - Essay Example Probably, it led to overestimation of his abilities and eventually led to his defeat. Napoleon – Early Years Napoleon Bonaparte was born in a wealthy family in Ajaccio, on the Mediterranean Island of Corsica on 15th August 1769. His father, Carol Bonaparte, was a lawyer and a political opportunist. At that time, Corsica had just been sold to France by Genoa. So, Napoleon was not of French origin. According to Marsh, there were both luck and personal factors which favored Napoleon in his rise to power (5). As his father climbed the political ladder and as his mother had connections with Corsica’s French military governor, Napoleon had the chance to enter the military academy at Brienne in the year 1779. As Landau points out, it was this entry into military that acted as the very basis of his rise to power. With extraordinary talent in areas like mathematics, the workaholic genius graduated as a second lieutenant in the artillery in the year 1785 (18). Though Napoleon was posted on the French mainland, he was able to engage actively in the Corsican politics. Though he supported Corsican rebel Pasquale Paoli in the beginning, there were differences in opinion later on, and the Bonaparte had to flee to France. The French Revolution during the latter half of the 18th century was a fertile soil for individuals with talent to come to the fore. Fremont-Barnes reflects that the people agitated throughout France in a protest against the atrocities committed by the wealthy and the church (58). Soon, King Louis was imprisoned and executed. Following this, the revolutionary government declared France a republic. However, there was total chaos as the nation was ruled by various fractions; and most notable of them was the Jacobin group led by Maximilien Robespierre. This revolutionary government in France shocked monarchies throughout Europe. Empires like Austria, Prussia, Russia, and Great Britain wanted to suppress the revolution and bring monarchy back to pow er in France. Soon, in 1972, the empires declared war on France. However, France was not fit to face them as the revolution had eliminated its military officers. Many of them had been killed and many had already fled the place. The Toulon Siege and the Path Ahead Thus, in the year 1793, Napoleon was commissioned as a captain in the artillery and was assigned to the units which were engaged in the task of eliminating British Garrison from the southern port of Toulon as it was found to be helping Royalist uprising. There, sheer luck came into play as he was made the commander of the siege on 16th September 1793. He was offered the position because the existing commander of the artillery was wounded (â€Å"Napoleon Bonaparte†). In the new position, Napoleon exhibited skill and mastery by capturing two important forts and eliminating the British fleet from the port. Though it was not a major victory, he managed to present it as a great achievement. As the entire French army was m arred by untrained people and lack of leadership, his performance, though minor, was noticed by a number of powerful men in Paris. This was followed by his ascend to the rank of Brigadier General. After this, Napoleon joined the campaign in Italy as the commandant of the artillery. However, by this time, the political atmosphere in Paris was rather bad as people were feeling highly insecure under the Directory, and, as a result, Robespierre was executed and

Yala Swamp Conflict Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Yala Swamp Conflict - Term Paper Example The aim of the project was to prevent degradation of the wetland and improve the lives of local people (Davenport 4). However, despite the project’s endeavor, it raised conflicts between the local communities on one side and county councils and the Dominion, founders of the project, on the other side. This, therefore, led to the emergence of Yala swamp conflict from the year 2003 to present.  It has caused a great attention and concerns that many African countries experience conflicts especially as a result of resource depletion and environmental degradation. As the U.S. United Nations delegate, I have been assigned a Judy to arbitrate an aspect of dispute in the Yala swamp conflict that exist between two sides, the one on the local community and the one on the Dominion and country council. After conducting my research on the disputing issue, I realized that the development project meant to improve the condition of Yala swamp was the main source of conflict (Davenport 11). I have been able to analyze and gain an understanding of the nature of the moral dimensions of conflict in the region. The conflicting parties are actually the stakeholders of the project where one party, the local community, is affected by the development project while the other party of both dominion and country council are the exploiters.  I also understand that conflict has emerged as a result of incompatible goals, which depend on contested natural resources. I realized that the local community feels deprived of the right to use land for farm by the development project hence contesting for the natural resources. Furthermore, this community lives in extreme poverty and therefore desire to acquire more land. Land conflict result to environmental degradation when a community is squeezed into a limited area and cause pressure on it.  

Three Year Marketing Plan of G Company Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2750 words

Three Year Marketing Plan of G Company - Essay Example This essay focuses on describing of the G Company's marketing plan. The researcher firstly presents mission statement of Company G that depicts its long-run intention to â€Å"enable consumers to improve the quality and convenience of their lives by providing high-quality, innovative electronic solutions†. The proposed product in this marketing plan is a small appliance electronic Ice-cream maker with quality assurance and at a cheaper price. In relation to its mission statement, Company G attempts to provide its customers with a high-quality product, i.e. the ice-cream maker, as per the targeted customers’ conveniences, facilitating innovative electronic equipments in the present competitive market scenario. It is described that the company will be targeting the middle-level economic groups, especially the households or families with children. The product, i.e. Company G’s ice-cream maker, will target the small appliances market of the US primarily. Thus, the co mpetitive environment of the small appliances industry in the US has been summarized henceforth with the application of the Porter’s Five Forces Model. The researcher also discusses three of Company G’s strengths and weaknesses that are related to the marketing of the new product and then selects four marketing objectives for Company G consisting of one objective for each of the four marketing mix elements. In conclusion, the researcher describes the specific actions that will be taken to measure the effectiveness of the plan.

Advantages of Traditional Budgeting Systems

Advantages of Traditional Budgeting Systems Traditional budgeting is one the first budgeting systems created. Traditional budgeting system is still commonly used in many organizations today. The reasons why organizations still using traditional budget, this is due to framework of control. The role of the budget is to give focus to an organization, and help the coordination of activities and enable control. Large companies might struggle to plan, coordinate and control their dealings without a budgetary system. Even smaller companies can benefit from the budgetary system to ensure the direction of the business, and how it can reach its goals. Second reason is its organizational culture; for the fundamental method of operating, it may not be possible for the organization to move away. Moreover, by their nature, budgets are a centrally coordinated activity within a business, and often the only one which brings together all aspects of the company. Budgets are often the one process which covers all areas of organisational activity (Otley, 1999). Third reason of an organization still using traditional budgeting system is the need to decentralise; this is recognized that banks institutions and other financial institutions are more suitable candidates for decentralisation than other types of businesses. For an example, Norman Macintosh observed that branch managers at Transamerica Finance Corporation had a great deal of freedom to run their operations according to standard operating procedures. Similarly, another example is Svenska Handelsbanken, the largest bank in Sweden sets parameters for branch managersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ discretion and then motivates its staff using competitive devices such as branch league tables (Alexa Michael and Technical Information Service, 2007). This approach can be successful in organizations where people work in similar but in independent units. However, it does not follow that this level of decentralization can be adopted by all organizations. Every organization is unique and it may be impossibl e to change the company culture to provide the necessary decentralisation. Successful decentralisation also depends on a great deal of trust being invested in teams throughout the organisation. Due to economic uncertainty, traditional budgeting has its limit. The disadvantage of traditional budgeting is it has insufficient external focus. Traditional budgeting is seldom focusing on strategy and is often conflicting. Besides that, it is time consuming and costly to put together, and also limit responsiveness and flexibility, whereby this is not good for economic uncertainty situation. This is because it often discourages change and only adds little value, budget tend to be bureaucratic and discourage creative thinking and requires too much valuable management time. Traditional budgeting system has an adverse impact on management behaviour, which can become dysfunctional with regard to the objectives of the organisation as a whole. Johnson (2005) explains that most budgets are not based on a rational, causal model of resource consumption, but are often the result of protracted internal bargaining processes. Conformance to budget is not seen as compatible with a drive towards continuous improvement. Under economic uncertainty, inflexibility is somehow seen as the key failing factor of traditional budgeting, and organizations are being urged to move towards continuous budgeting systems to enable speedy and coordinated adaptations to actual and anticipated changes in the economic (Neely et al, 1997). Continuous budgeting system gives companies the agility and capability to follow changes in market situations, and to cope with economic uncertainty while keeping an eye on strategic objectives (Lorain, 2010). Continuous budgeting system solves problems associated with infrequent budgeting and hence results in more accurate forecast. It is also more responsive to changing circumstances under economic uncertainty. Some companies use a continuous budget which means that a ongoing 12 months budget is presented by consecutively adding a new budget as each current month expire, such a process allow management to work at anytime, within the present 1 month component of a full 12 month annual budget. Continuous budgeting system make the planning process less irregular, rather than having managers go into the budget getting period at a specific time, managers are continuously involved in planning and budgeting process. The advantages of a continuous budget under economic uncertainty situation include, eliminating a fiscal year mind set by recognizing that business is an ongoing operation and should be managed accordingly. It also allows management to make corrective steps as forecast business cond ition change such as in economic uncertainty. It helps to reduce or eliminating the budget planning process that occurs at the end of each fiscal year. Another recent survey jointly conducted by the American Productivity Quality Centres and IBM Global Business Services has found that companies focusing on planning, budgeting and forecasting as a business strategy are higher performers in all area than those focusing on cost accounting, control and cost management. The study also showed that high performing organizations tend to complete their budgeting cycle in 30 days compared to 90 days in low performing organizations and most of the high performers used continuous budgeting system when the economic in uncertain (Kinney and Raiborn, 2008). Another example in the article author has mention how Kenyan business sail through under economic uncertainty. Kenyan have experience challenging times with business struggling to plan and price their product carefully so as not to erode the profit margins that they had planned for. Having exchange rate problems. Smart cfos employ a budgeting, principally a set of procedures used to develop budget. Author mention that Kenyan organization have limited resources and and they need to effectively plan and use them. This is why they implement budgets to help provides a means to achieve this. Budgets provide a useful benchmark of performance and help control profit and operations when compared to actual performance. The resulting variance guide management in appreciating what they need to do in the subsequent period. Employee performance and managerial performance is usually measured on qualitative terms, but budget gives a new meaning to evaluate performance through numbers and helps in r ewarding high performers and correcting the low performers. Due to the economic downturn, a number of well run companies have adapted to their specific circumstances and prepare master budget that comprises of performance financial statement, a capital budget, and a financial budget. However, some organizations have adapted to the concept of continuous budgets. With the fluctuation of the dollar, business are emploting a variety of techniques of budgeting to ensure that they make profits.

Experimental Training Program: Wilderness/adventure Learning :: essays research papers

Experimental Training Program: Wilderness/Adventure Learning Training employees is a fundamental element of a corporations success. A company succeeds only as well as the people running it can perform. This training process can cover many skills and go into many areas of expertise. One key element that has only recently come into action is an outdoor- based experiential training program. Commonly called "ropes courses," wilderness courses or adventure learning programs have been in use in the USA since the early 1980's, and by organizations in the UK since the early 1970's. Outdoor programs have been most beneficial when used to promote effective work teams and used to enhance leadership and management skills in the participants. Outdoor- based training programs seem to accomplish these objectives by allowing participants to develop a high level of trust in their peers, improve their problem-solving ability, and generally improve the level of interpersonal communications between group members. Companies are looking for leaders that can launch them into a new era. Constant improvement is necessary to meet the growth of challenging competition. So who defines leadership? What is a leader and how would you raise these skills that may be laying dormant in your subordinates? Organizations need great leaders to help them successfully survive the many difficulties of this decade. Yet, the very notion of leadership has rapidly degenerated into a clichà ©, a buzz word. In many people's minds, leadership has become identified with an overly simplistic conception of vision and empowerment. Although these concepts do play an important role in the leadership process, they only scratch the surface of what an exceptional leader actually does on a day-to-day basis. What do leaders really do to make an organization work well? In my research I found that great leaders exhibit nine different kinds of behaviors that enable them to bring out the best in the people around them. Some of the nine behaviors of leadership listed below involve building participatory teams, some involve using "situational management strategies," while others enhance personal resources. Listed separately, the nine behaviors include: Developing people. Being able to influence others. Encouraging teamwork. Empowering people. Using multiple options thinking. Taking intelligent risks. Being passionate about work. Having a strong, clear vision. Stretching one's personal creativity. While many people think leaders are unique, even born to that state of excellence, I have found just the opposite. With proper experiential training, it is possible for people to learn these leadership behaviors. In other words, leaders can be developed. By all means they should be developed at many levels in an organization because leadership in a hierarchical situation stimulates the best in their followers and thereby increases overall productivity.

Big Pharma’s Marketing Tactics Essay

The Big Pharma controversy is about the wide-scale marketing malpractices used by big pharmaceutical companies in America which resulted in a series of negative implications on consumers. It revolves around pharmaceutical companies, government regulators, health professionals (or â€Å"unprofessional†), market consumers and the medical watchdogs. The dispute was formed between the supporters of the marketing tactics used by pharmaceutical representatives and the detractors to it. Specifically it is the context that matters: Is it right, or rather ethical for the medical professionals to profit at the expense of the patients? Are there more underlying factors that led to this controversy? It is important to achieve a balance between the benefits and drawbacks of the marketing tactics used by the pharmaceutical industry; however it is more essential to consider the ethical issues pertaining to these tactics. Certainly, both the consumer welfare and health are of primary concern; but our ethical obligations are not discharged solely by a guarantee of some degree of protection from harm. Still, I strongly believe that the health considerations of consumers should be put before profit maximization, because, unmistakably, the pharmaceutical industry has the responsibility to treat people’s health, instead of harming them. This essay will seek to examine the ethical implications of drug promotion efforts by pharmaceutical giants, the social impacts of drug promotion on consumers as well as the approaches to contain this dispute. Key Issues To Be Discussed  The key ethical issues of argument related to Big Pharma are the questionable marketing practices exercised by the pharmaceutical industry, product safety, science for sale and lobbying efforts. These critical issues have been emotive and multi-dimensional. As a result, it attracted a wide range of views about the topic. Questionable Marketing Practices The marketing efforts of Big Pharma have always been under the media spotlight and the scrutinization of the public and medical watchdogs. The pharmaceutical marketers have made use of different medium to reach to the potential consumers and professionals. The extensiveness of the promotion efforts of the drugs had proliferated into every corners people’s lives. However, many believe that the pharmaceutical industry’s hunger for profits triumphs over their genuine desire to help the public, and that this blinded concern for profits continues to shape the future of this industry. The core of this debate is whether the high cost of drugs is justifiable by the cost of research and development done by the pharmaceutical companies. Has the money been used elsewhere? In fact, the world’s major drug companies have been accused of spending large sums of money on promoting their drugs, rather than researching on them. Big Pharma has developed a plethora of ways to reach out to the public to advertise on their latest and greatest drugs; from television and radio spots to newspaper and internet ads. The advertising budget for the drug companies have sky-rocketed to a significant sum. In 2007, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)’s biggest advertising price tag was attached to Advair, the firm’s blockbuster asthma medication, which rung up US$127 million in advertising spending. The total amount of money spent on marketing by pharmaceuticals was U. S. $57. 5 billion for 2004. The total spent on domestic industrial pharmaceutical R&D was U. S. $31. 5 billion. Clearly, the promotional workings of the drug companies have shown that the U. S. pharmaceutical industry is still mainly marketing-driven. Corrupted practices among doctors and health professionals are not uncommon in the pharmaceutical industry either. Doctors or even undergraduate medical students were bombarded with logo-infested freebies by the companies, in order to persuade them to prescribe their drugs to patients. Many physicians were subjected to financial lures by companies to convince them to favour their drugs and prescribe them. Back in 2009, a study out of Harvard University and Massachusetts General Hospital found that 84 percent of doctors have ties to drug companies, a ten percent drop from five years earlier. But roughly two thirds of doctors still accept drug samples, while 70 percent accept food and beverage incentives from drug companies. And fourteen percent continue to accept cash payments for services. While some of these unethical practices were tapered off, not all were uprooted. Some octors did not disclose the amount of gifts and cash which they have accepted from the drug companies. They believe that their decisions on the prescription of drugs would not be influenced by the gifts which they have accepted. In my opinion, the supporters, primarily the health professionals and representatives of the pharmaceutical giants, have disregarded the genuine health implications and the high drug costs incurred to the general public in concern. They might try fending off such moral challenges by claiming that substantial amount of advertising is necessary to boost the sales of their products. Securing more profits would also mean more money can be invested on research for better drugs. However, it is evident that the excessive promotional efforts of drugs have blinded the pharmaceutical industry, in the pursuit of more profits and sales. Their main concern of profit maximization still remains ahead of the interests of the community. Corruption practices among health professionals should also be stemmed out so that unfair and biased decisions made by doctors would not affect the drugs prescribed to consumers. A significant sum of money should still be used for the development of better drugs to improve the quality of the lives of people. In conclusion, the principle of utilitarianism actually provides the latitude in deciding the extent of marketing efforts by pharmaceutical giants. Health professionals should not benefit at the expense of the patients. Instead, doctors should always act in the best interest of the patients. It is thus important to achieve a balance between the marketing efforts and the genuine interest for the health of the public. Product Safety The safety of the drugs produced has been a compelling issue in this argument. Drug companies have been reportedly illegally promoting drugs for uses for which they were not approved by the authorities. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) alleged that Astra Zeneca, an Anglo-Swedish giant, illegally promoted Seroquel, an anti-psychotic drug, for off-label purposes, specifically to physicians who do not normally treat patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Instead, they marketed it in long-term care facilities and prisons for the treatment of unapproved uses, including Alzheimer’s disease, anger management, anxiety, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and depression. Subsequently, it led to the recall of the drugs and AstraZeneca paid $520 million to resolve allegations for illegally marketing Seroquel for unapproved uses. Some of these unapproved drugs were marketed through different means. Very often, these off-label drugs were made from low quality materials, or were contaminated in the production process. Due to the competitive drug market, manufacturers are tempted to cut corners by outsourcing production to potentially unreliable third parties and skimp on testing the product before releasing it into the market. As a result, some of these products could pose significant health risks to consumers. The trust consumers have on Big Pharma still remains as a big question. Should consumers continue to trust that the drugs manufactured by the pharmaceutical companies are legal and safe for consumption? There is no definite answer to it. Pharmaceuticals are responsible for saving and improving the lives of many people. However, it seemed to turn out otherwise. Again, profit maximization remains as the top priority of pharmaceutical companies. I believe it would still take some time before the drug industry come to a conclusion between profit-making and the health considerations of the public. In my opinion, it is reasonable for drug companies to source for cheaper alternative and achieve low costs in drug production; however, it should adjust or halt the development if serious problems emerge. Thereby, it is important for drug manufacturers to be mindful of the negative consequences that their products have on consumers. Science for sale Science has always been considered an objective endeavour that removes any form of bias in researches and is inherently true and reliable. The results should be generated independently, without bias and with the sole desire to find the best treatments. However, medical researches today, have become corrupted by money and special interests, and often misrepresent the truth to suit personal needs or corporate economic interests. The underlying motive still boils down to profit-making. Consider the example of the large and widely quoted Jupiter trial â€Å"proving† that Crestor, a cholesterol-lowering drug, could prevent heart attacks in people with normal or low cholesterol. In this trial researchers twisted the data to suit the commercial sponsor of the study. An independent review of the Jupiter trial published in the Archives of Internal Medicine showed that it was deeply flawed and the actual data did not show any benefit for the prevention of heart disease. Most medical researches are undoubtedly funded by pharmaceutical giants. Hence, in order to introduce the product into the market, findings are often tailored to be parallel with the economic interests of the company. I believe it is unethical for Big Pharma to pay researchers to twist the truth about bad outcomes and to sneak distorted information and marketing messages into medical journal articles. The consumers’ healths are at stake as they place much trust in the manufacturer when purchasing the products off shelves. If the research, development and distribution of drugs continue the same as it used to be, not only healthcare is at risk, but so are the research enterprise and the reputations of government bodies. The integrity of scientific research is too important to be left to the invisible hand of the marketplace. Healthcare authorities are needed to regulate and ensure that medical results are not manipulated by selfish pharmaceutical companies which are only concern with individual gains. Lobbying efforts Pharmaceutical giants have spent heavily to lobby government bodies. Part of the high costs of drugs is explainable by the high expenditure devoted to lobbying. New disclosure reports in Congress showed that familiar players at the top of the health-care influence heap, includes $6. 2 million in lobbying by the dominant Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) and $4 million by the American Medical Association. Detractors of pharmaceutical lobby argue that the drug’s industry influence allows it to promote legislation friendly to drug manufacturers at the expense of patients. The perfect example of this is the dishonourable legacy of Nevada Senator and U. S. Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid. Reid was exposed for accepting large sums of money from Big Pharma in order to craft and guide the health care bill in Big Pharma’s favour. The health care bill drastically expanded Big Pharma’s monopolistic control over America’s health care. Corruption practices by healthcare regulators and government bodies are unavoidable. Acceptance of extravagant gifts and money from powerful lobbyists like Big Pharma would easily allow them to control the government and shape the public health care policies. Financially influenced politicians have their campaigns heavily funded by the pharmaceutical industry. In return, these politicians would help Big Pharma in warding off most government regulations so as to promote their drugs into the drug market. The practice of lobbying is both unethical and deceptive. Such a notion demonstrates the unscrupulous manner in which the pharmaceutical industry runs their operations. It also illustrates that they have no qualms about manipulating the Congress and deceiving the public to achieve their ultimate goals. In my opinion, the government should keep check on these corrupted practices in the Congress and should ban any form of corrupted behaviours that have a large cost to the public. Bridging the gap between the proponents and the detractors Pharmaceutical companies should consider the impact of their actions on the society, who are also direct stakeholders to the issue. The importance of corporate social responsibility (CSR) should be further put into actions. Big Pharma should always take actions that protect and improve the welfare of society as a whole along with their own interests. Besides safeguarding economic and legal obligations, certain responsibilities to society should be extended beyond these obligations. I believe that pharmaceutical companies which simply conduct more researches to prove the safety of their products are not going to win over the public totally. Instead, the businesses need to develop more counter-images or cases to boost good representation. It could be better illustrated by taking the case of GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)’s initiative of selling the company’s malaria vaccine in Africa for no more than a 5 percent profit. GSK is one of the few pharmaceutical companies that succeeded in developing drugs that are beneficial in the developing world. It is thus evident that the pharmaceutical giant is not all about profit maximizing, but also have the intention to help the less fortunate people. I strongly feel that more stringent regulation and compliance standard from the government would be one way to instill trust in the detractors after all the spotty scandals of Big Pharma. An example would be to issue stronger warnings on the bribes accepted by politicians and researchers from pharmaceutical companies. Given the complexity of the issue, it would help to eradicate any forms of bias in the short run, regardless whether it is for medical researches or bills passed on by the legislation. All in all, it is still dependent on the integrity of researchers and politicians to weigh the risk against potential benefits derived with their own judgement. Higher transparency from the government and corporate would be crucial in determining the trust from the public and the criticism from the detractors. As such, with higher transparency, and more giving back to the society, it might help to regain the public trust and reduce detractor’s scepticism. According to the CSR Pyramid, it is undoubtedly that the biggest responsibility of the Big Pharma should still remain as profit maximization. However, legal obligations should not be neglected as well. Corrupted actions should be eliminated from the industry and healthy marketing practices should be encouraged instead. Accurate medical researches should be bias-free and not swayed by any forms of financial lures. Health professionals should always act in the best interest of patients. The pharmaceutical scene would still require further fine-tuning before we could promote a healthy relationship between the government, the manufacturers and the consumers.

Corporations as Moral Agents Essay

I chose to evaluate the second debate because I thought it was the most significant to the purpose of the class: to analyze the moral responsibility of business. The debaters were assigned to negate and affirm the following motion: Corporations are Moral Agents. In my opinion, this motion comes down to the decision to hold corporations responsible for their (corporations) decisions on a moral basis or just hold them responsible for their decisions on a legal basis. If a company were found to be a moral agent, then they would not only have a utilitarian obligation to who they are fiduciaries for, but also a moral obligation to society regardless of stakeholder or shareholder theory. On the other hand, if a company were not found to be a moral agent, then the phrase â€Å"it’s just business† would hold truth for corporations as a whole; as long as the company acted within the boundaries of the law and to maximize the utility of whom they represent as an agent, there would be no moral ground to criticize or opt for a change in practices. In this essay I will outline the arguments each side used to support their case, the additional arguments I believe should have been used, and an evaluation of who won the debate and reason why. The debate was composed of two teams, each of which had 4 members. They each had a 5-minute main speech to prove their arguments, and a 2-minute rebuttal speech to disprove that of their opposing counterparts. Although the speeches were given in an alternating fashion between both teams, I will layout all of the proposition’s arguments, then layout all of the oppositions arguments, and finally move on to chronologically stating the rebuttals. The first speaker of the proposition cleverly set the tone for the debate by defining important terms from the motion. Speaker 1 defined agents as something or someone that acts in behalf of another, and then went on to use the transitive property and identity thesis to state that corporations are moral agents but not moral entities. Yet, the law treats and defines corporations as entities. Just because people are needed to help make decisions does not mean that a corporation is not an entity. Speaker 1 then mentioned that individuals are moral agents, to confirm the fact that the transitive property makes corporations moral agents because they are built from such. Without the assumption that corporations are not entities, the transitive property makes less sense because a corporation would be defined as one single unit. Under law, people and corporations are considered legally equal entities The affirmative team had four main arguments that were divided amongst their four speakers. The first speaker stated that there is legal and social precedent that the corporation entity is a fiction, and that it is an association of shareholders for the gain of shareholders solely. Their second speaker said that morality is related to the law and the freedom of the individual to decide what he/she will do in regards to the law. The third speaker reiterated their definition for moral agents as an argument: the corporation is not an entity of itself because it cannot make decisions on its own;, yet is a moral agent because it is made of individual moral agents, thus it acts with moral imperative due to the transitive property (a leads to b leads to c). Finally, their fourth speaker used the CEO of Whole Foods, John Mackey, to support his claim saying that a corporation is a moral agent because their decisions do not affect parts of the corporation but affect it as a whole. The first speaker not only defined the terms, but also spoke about the legal obligations and precedent that forces companies to maximize profits for shareholder within the confines of the law, without having to weigh in the morality of their decisions. She stated that it is management’s duty to safeguard the wealth of the corporation. Speaker 1 said that utilitarianism supports the motion because when the happiness of society in general is measured only individual happiness is aggregated with no regard for the happiness of corporations. Just because the theory of utilitarianism does not include corporations in their measure of happiness does not mean they are not entities. A dog is an entity, but is not included in this measure either. Moreover, mentioning that law does not require companies to weigh in morality of their decisions completely limits any argument the affirming side could say with the exception of the transitive property. According to that phrase, corporations are not moral agents under law. Also, they use the law here to support their argument, while in their definitions the argued against it to disprove corporations as entities. This double purpose use weakens the claims. The debate concluded by leaving the audience with an analogy that was to be used again later on in the debate: a corporation is a sports team: its an agent, comprised of constituents or players, that makes plays to win or lose a game; yet without the players, it does not exist. Transposed to the actual corporation, the corporation would be the team with the managers and employees as its players, and making or losing money as their wins or losses. The analogy is valid, with the exception of the last part, considering the existence of shell corporations or solely patent holding companies that do not require any employees. The second speaker of the proposition furthered his team’s original claim that individuals are moral agents. He proved that individuals are moral agents by using Kant and French’s arguments of identity and transitive property. He mentions that the autonomy of the will is the foundation of morality and that a sense of law is within everyman that can reason. Moreover, he goes on to talk about universal laws and Kant’s categorical imperative saying to â€Å"act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law. † These arguments do prove individuals as moral agents, but at no point in time was it linked to how this would prove corporations to be moral agents, other than the restatement of the transitive property. On the other hand, they could have tried to argue that corporations had autonomy of the will because different managers within the company exercise it to make a conglomerate of different decisions, thus giving the company a unique autonomy of the will and making it a moral agent according to Kant. The third speaker of the proposition starts by delineating the difference between an agent and a moral agent. He states that agents are something or someone that act on behalf of another, while moral agents are the same but with the ability to make decisions upon their own morality. He then goes into mentioning the transitive property again, but this time it is at least cleverly tied to the team’s first speaker’s point mentioning that corporations cannot be moral entities as there is a legal precedent that disproves this claim, thus supporting that fact that corporations have to be composed of individual entities. I find it hard to believe that legal precedents disprove this claim when corporations are legally defined as entities. Just the fact that the word legal is used weakens the argument, which should have only spoken about precedents trying to avoid any issue of legality. He then goes on to say that because people who are moral agents compose companies, companies act with a moral imperative due to the transitive property. This is valid, but repeated several times. It should have been built upon to create a stronger argument that legitimized corporations as moral decision-making agents on its own. The fact that a unique combination of moral agents (managers) make decisions in a company means that a corporation has a unique decision making ability different to that of any other moral agent in existence, thus making it a moral agent within itself. Lastly, the fourth speaker for the proposition brought it some new points. He used Mackey to support his argument saying that a corporation is a moral agent because any decision it makes does not only affect parts of the corporation, but the corporation as a whole. This means that any decision a manager makes (with morality in mind) affects the company as a whole, and then the company affects the community at large through a decision that was originally made by an individual that weighed in morality in his decision making process. He mentioned how Whole Foods acts as a moral agent because every decision made by individuals within the firm affects its customers, supplier, employees and several others of the company’s stakeholders. He now goes on to use the team/player analogy speaker 1 told the audience to keep in mind. He says that when a player makes a decision, which as an individual was based upon morality to such extent, it affects his entire team and the team then goes on to affect the community at large. This means that the morality that weighed into that player’s decision was carried on by the team, thus affecting the community it resides in. I find this to be stretching the transitive property to thin. I made the decision to buy a mac book air computer; this decision affected Apple, Foxconn, and all the suppliers and companies involved in the process of making and distributing a mac book air. Saying that my â€Å"moral† decision to buy a mac book air computer makes all of these companies moral agents I find impossible. Moving on to the negative team, it identified 5 arguments within their speeches. The first speaker of the opposition argued that corporations were legally and contractually set-up for one purpose, thus eliminating any possibility for morality in its decisions. Moreover, she also argued that a corporation is not independent to act by what we, as people, think is right or wrong. This really supports the transitive property the other team is arguing for because it supports the idea that companies need people to act. Afterwards, the second speaker of the team argued that the only thing that makes someone or something a moral agent is the intention to act and not consequences of his/hers/its actions, thus a corporation could not be deemed a moral agent upon the consequences of their actions. Yet corporations do have intentions when making decisions. When Apple decided to publically apologize for its ineffective new map application on the IPhone, its intention was to help disperse the bad press and consumers irritation. The third speaker then argued that the majority of managers see themselves as acting in a morally neutral environment, thus making all the decisions made within a corporation amoral. If individuals are not basing decisions upon morality, then the transitive property would make corporations amoral decision-makers as well. Lastly, the fourth speaker of the opposition juxtaposes the legally implied impossibility of a corporation being a moral agent with the societal views on the matter to further disprove the claim. Laws and beliefs are influenced and based on society as a whole. If society does not see corporations as moral agents, which it doesn’t, then they aren’t. The negative team began by redefining the terms in the motion. She said that a moral agent is a being able of acting with preference to being right or wrong. If you look carefully at the words used, you can notice that they used the word being instead of entity, thus inherently defining a corporation as unable to be a moral agent. She first argues that a corporation has a legally binding duty to its shareholders to maximize profit. She says that, through history, corporations have only come into existence for the benefit of its shareholders. This is all partially true, but in reality profit is not always the entire purpose. When entrepreneurs create companies, they have values and specific purposes they want to tackle within society. The need for more entertainment, or better treatment for patients with a particular disease the founder of the company might have had. Companies are founded to fulfill a purpose that is not always to make profit. Speaker 2 then moves on to say that corporations are not independent to act upon what is right or wrong. For a corporation to be a moral agent it has to be able to self-determine. She supports this claim by signaling that a legal structure that is a moral agent cannot be giving birth by communication between other moral agents (people). To further prove a corporation lack of independence in this regard, she poses the dilemma of double counting. When an individual within a corporation commits a crime, both the individual and the corporation are punished independent of each other. Although this helps disprove the transitive property, it also means corporations are found legally liable for its self-determining decisions made by the conglomeration of its management team. The second speakers from both teams based their arguments of the same readings from Kant and Peter French. Speaker 2 of the opposition argued that corporations do not really have any other intention other than to make profit, and that even though the consequences of its decisions can be judged through a moral lens, these cannot be used to prove the morality of such decision maker as morality lies within the intentions of the decision and not the consequences. Again, this is only true to some extent. Entrepreneurs create companies based on values and passions. To say that the only purpose for which companies are created is for profit is to say that entrepreneurs are passionless. She concludes by saying that Corporations do not have to consider the categorical imperative of morality when making a decision, because they do not have the capacity as an entity to evaluate the categorical imperative and have the universal law in mind. This does not consider the fact that all the decisions made by managers did consider the categorical imperative of morality, thus every decision made by the firm is a moral decision. The third speaker from the negative team referred to a phenomenon seen in many large corporations; the delegation of responsibilities for one’s own decisions. She stated that most managers actually see themselves as acting in a morally neutral environment. Yet the transitive property only needs one manager basing his/her decisions upon morality for the entire corporation to become a moral agent. Moreover, she went on to tie her teammates arguments together by using a soccer team analogy. She proposed a theoretical soccer team whose purpose is to win games (equivalent to a company’s legal binding to maximize shareholder profits), and stated that the players and managers are the moral agents leading the team to victory. This would mean that soccer teams do not consider morality while playing, which I believe to be false. I doubt an elementary soccer team coach will tell the children in his/her team that it does not matter how much they hurt the other team with fouls as long as they win the game. She used Moore’s purposes of encouraging excellence in business practices, encourage practice of the corporation itself, etc. to prove that these â€Å"purposes† alluded to the individual morality of each employee and not to that of a corporation. Yet Moore argues that the excellence of business practices transposes to the practice of the corporation itself. A company that makes soccer balls’ excellence in business practice would be to make the best soccer ball possible even if they cost a little more. Under Moore, as long as corporations can be self-sustaining, they are to offer the best product possible even though it does not directly maximize profits (in the short-run at least). Yes, his theory is to be applied by individuals, but for the purpose of the business practice of the corporation. There is a sense of morality in a corporation that creates the best product it can for its customers. Lastly, the last speaker of the opposition began by establishing the notion that corporations always have a value maximization purpose and its decision-making has to reflect it. Thus inherently mandating how decisions have to be made in, and removing the corporation’s morality. Yet this ignores the morality of establishing that value maximization purpose, and assumes that a company can only have one value-maximization purpose. A division of a company might have the sole purpose of maximizing customer satisfaction. Additionally, he says that morality’s constraint on a company’s decision making exists only when a company acts outside the law. This would mean anything done within the law is moral. He gave examples of how society evaluates a company to show that morality fails to form part of that evaluation process as conveyed by the continuous investments in companies (like Nike) whom are constantly found to be using sweatshops for value maximization purposes. It is true that at the end of the day investors look at the earnings, but customers might no be interested in wearing shoes that were made by hungry children, thus negatively affecting earnings. In this sense, society does judge corporations on a moral imperative. There were a total of 8 rebuttals speeches. The statement and analysis of the rebuttals is going to be done in the chronological order of relevant speeches, thus alternating between the affirming and negating teams. The first speaker of the proposition began the rebuttal arguments by trying to completely change the playing field. She said tried to invalidate the opposition’s claim that there is no legal avenue to measure morality by saying that the fact that there is no legal avenue to measure morality says we are analyzing this question within the instrumental sphere, yet we should be doing so within a normative sphere as morality lies on it. I would argue that the instrumental sphere is more useful for evaluation of the motion because it is defined by practice rather than pure theory. The motion deals with real physical corporations and the morality of these corporations should be evaluated through a criterion that can analyze decisions that affect the real world. The second rebuttal speaker quoted French and used the aggregate theory, frequently touched by the proposition to support their claims for corporations, to describe a mob. This argument equaled the moral state of a corporation to that of a mob, who French explicitly said was amoral, thus completely delegitimizing the foundation of the propositions case with the use of the affirmatives team’s own sources. He closed by saying, â€Å"To treat a corporation as an aggregate for any purposes is to fail to recognize the corporation as different from a mob. † I thought this to be the killing blow in the debate considering the third rebuttal speech basically just said that even if corporation does not need to act morally, they due consult to morality when making decisions. I think what should have been done is clarify that a mob is a disordered group of people, while a corporation has a hierarchal defined structure. The second negating rebuttal speech focused on tackling to the transitive property by trying to turn it against the affirmative team. She said both sides agreed that a corporation was a sum of moral agents, and went on to say that the moral agency of a corporation is the sum its managers. This means that morality lies within each individual and can be summed up as such because there is no morality of the corporation on its own that has to be added. This disproves the idea that a corporation has moral agency of its own. She used Enron as an example by mentioning that its managers were tried for immoral acts, and would otherwise not have been if Enron were actually a moral agent. Yet, the addition of morality through individual managers creates a unique moral identity that could be identified as that of the corporation’s. The sixth rebuttal from the negating team coupled the restatement of their definition of a moral agent with the team analogy mentioned at the beginning of the debate to show how outrageous the propositions use of the transitive property really was. She said, â€Å"Our definition of a moral agent is a being that is able to act upon moral tendencies. If the player acts immorally, it does not mean the team is a moral agent, or for that matter that the entire universe is one single moral agent’. This argued against the idea that if a player makes a moral decision that has an impact on its team this is carried on by the team onto the community, thus making the team a moral agent. Theoretically, according to the transitive property and through a moral sphere lens this would be the case, but the motion is being viewed through the instrumental sphere lens. Under this instrumental length, the transitive property loses a lot of its validity. The last speaker of the opposition made a last attempt to restate all three of his team’s arguments, but these had all already been disproved through the rebuttal and no extra supporting evidence was given to make them viable again. On the other hand, the last rebuttal speech of the negating team focused on further disproving the aggregate theory. She stated that the moral aspects of a corporation come directly from the individuals within the firm. Moreover, she said that Kant’s requisites, for morality, of freedom of will and autonomy cannot be applied to corporations because that freedom of will and autonomy lies within each individual employee. What is not considered is the unique will a corporation has as a consequence of the wills of all of its employees.

Interview quiz Essays

Interview quiz Essays Interview quiz Essay Interview quiz Essay Name: Sazzad Hossain Id: 082 084 0 10 Eng 103. 23 For QUIZ How to Prepare for a Job Interview You have just got your degree. You have applied for a fantastic job and are thrilled to get a letter inviting you to attend an interview. Once the euphoria has subsided you begin to feel a little nervous and delf-doubt begins to creep in. People worry that they may make fools of themselves or fall flat on their faces. The job interview is a hurdle that causes many people to panic. It ranks alongside a visit to the dentist in terms of fear and loathing.It makes people break out into cold sweats, sleep badly, and turns their stomachs into a sailor’s knot. Interviews can indeed be scary, especially if you have not been interviewed for a job before. However, a job interview does not need to be so traumatic as there are simple steps you can take to give yourself the best chance to succeed. To do well at an interview you have to find out as much as possible about the job, get a friend to give you a mock interview, and plan for the day well in advance. The first step is to find out about the company and position.Nearly all companies have a mission statement which outlines their aims, priorities and goals. The body shop, for example, is strongly against animal testing. Dropping hints at the interview that you are committed to animal rights will help convince the interview panel that your values match theirs. Another way to increase your knowledge of the company is to look at its ab=nnual report and organizational structure. Showing that you have taken the time to read lengthy and complex information related to the company is certain to be viewed favorably.The internet is a great source of information in this regard and it is also of value in that you can comment on the company’s website during the interview. You should also find out about any new products or services the company may be offering. If the job you are applying for is in marketing, for instance, the interview panel may want you to comment on rival products or say something about their own product’s strengths and weaknesses. Finally, you also need to find out as much as you can about the position that you are applying for.Look carefully at the job description, which should give a detailed list of both essential and desirable skills necessary for the job. Knowing that the job requires excellent interpersonal and communication skills will allow you to prepare a few words detailing your exception abilities in this area. If word processing is desirable, you will be asked to use. You should also focus on the responsibilities and duties that will expected of you. Make sure you know what these are as they will be important for the interview itself and also in the next stage of your preparation; the mock interview.Now that you have all the information you need about the company and the job, you should brainstorm as many possible interview questions as you can for the practice interview. Most interviews will begin with simple question about yourself to help put you at ease and this is best place to start your brainstorming. Be prepared for open-ended questions’ such as, Tell us a little about yourself. Such requests for information are intended to find out about your ability to speak coherently, and are also used to reveal any negative characteristics you may have.Another common question is, What could you bring to the job? and it is here that your research will prove invaluable. You should also brainstorm situations that might occur in the job that you are applying for. If you are applying for a position as an air steward, for instance, you would need to prepare an answer to the question, What would you do if a passenger were rude to you? If applying for a position as a research assistant, you need to be able to answer, without excessive pausing or hesitation, questions on where to find information quickly. hen the mock interview has finished, get your friend to give you some honest feedback. Ask your friend which questions you did well on and which ones made your seem unconvincing or unsure. Also ask if any of your answers gave a wrong impression of your personality and make any changes that are necessary. Giving yourself a mock interview not only helps to prepare for the real interview, but also increases your chances of success. Once you have practiced you mock interview and are comfortable with your responses, you have to plan for the day itself.Apart from making several space copies of your CV, references, and qualifications to hand out tp the interview panel, you should make copies of any written projects that you completed at university that show your abilities in a good light. The people on an interview panel do not necessarily want to hear about what you can do, they want to see evidence of what you can do. Telling your future employers that you can write well or that you have good ideas on presenting information is never as effective as showing them examples of your work.The next step is to organize your transportation to the interview. Make sure that you know where the interview is going to take place, how to get there and how long it will take. You will also need anticipate any possible problems such as traffic jams and inclement weather. If the interview is taking place during rush hour, give yourself extra time to get to the interview location. The same is true if the weather forecaster has predicted bad weather. Nothing creates a worse impression that arriving late for an interview.Indeed, it is much wiser to arrive early to allow yourself time to freshen up after the journey. This relates to the final and perhaps most important part of your interview preparation which is making sure you look presentable. This requires you to get your clothes ready well before the interview. Finding out at the last minute that your interview attire is noticeably stained, no longer fits, or has button missing somewhere leads to panic and stress. Wearing nice, clear clothes, and even having your hair neatly cut or styled attractively does much to increase your self- confidence.Rightly or wrongly, employers often make up their minds about a candidate within the first fifteen seconds of the interviews, so the way you look when you first walk in courts a great deal. Interview panels often have a difficult time choosing the right candidate for the position as there are so many applicants who have the qualities and skills they are looking. Spending some time doing some basic research, practicing your interview technique and organizing well in advance for the big day will maximize your chances of persuading the interviewers that you are the best person for the job.Being interviewed is stressful and it is only natural to feel nervous about it. However, successful applicants overcome the anxiety involved through meticulous preparation. This may sound like hard work, but the reward is getting the job you want. These steps are not a secret. They are listed in nearly every interview guide that you will find in books, magazines or on the internet. The reason that they are recommended is because they have worked for the countless number of people who have used them. If you follow these steps, I am sure they will also work for you.

Why Are Cosmetics So Attractive to Adolescent Girls Speech or Presentation

Why Are Cosmetics So Attractive to Adolescent Girls - Speech or Presentation Example I feel that my aims and objectives were simple but relevant. Young girls’ self-esteem usually plummets as they reach adolescence because it is the time when they are developing their own identities. The research question opens up to a world of possibilities in terms of topics to discuss in the literature. The literature review provided much information about the topic at hand and more. It is comprehensive enough to cover the history of cosmetics, societal influence on women to look good, the beauty myth propagated by media and other media influences, adolescence and some theories that relate to the building of their self-esteem.   All these come together to explain some possible answers to the research question for this study. The use of questionnaires and focus group discussion will allow me to delve deeper into the issue with actual adolescent girls aged 13 to 17. I will get the opportunity to hear their insights first-hand as they discuss within a group the following questions: - Do you use cosmetics? If yes, which ones? - - How often do you use cosmetics? - Why do you use cosmetics? - How do you feel when you use cosmetics? - Do you use cosmetics with your friends? - How do you think people see you when you use cosmetics? - What do you think you can get out of using cosmetics? Right now, it seems so easy because I am only visualizing it, but I am sure that there will be several challenges along the way such as seeking the necessary permissions to conduct the study or dealing with uncooperative participants. In terms of preparation, I guess I failed to anticipate what I would feel in front of an audience. My stage fright was terrible but it was good that I had a small audience of people I knew. It was also great that they were so supportive. I think it is because they can relate to my situation because each of us had our turn presenting. I need to learn to be more confident in speaking. I know being prepared with my talk is a must, but I should learn to loosen up and be more candid, be open to whatever possibilities that may arise during my presentation.

Self Evaluation-Educational Objective Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 1

Self Evaluation-Educational Objective - Essay Example To further enhance my skills I would like to get enrolled in the MBA program where I can gain more knowledge and at the same time utilize my practical experiences and contribute to this industry. I got knowledge about it by a friend who has taken part in the MBA program and was satisfied with the curriculum and results of it. I believe that this is the right time to apply for an MBA program as education provides advantages and helps in improving the performance of the person in practical work life. I believe the most important concepts today are globalization, corporate governance and group work. The concepts and theories related to them help a lot in understanding and managing issues which arise. The most crucial issues to be managed are cultural diversity, discrimination and lack of communication skills. I believe that MBA program will be helpful in understanding the ways to tackle these issues and maintain a level of understanding between the group members or employees of the orga nization. I have the capability to work in a group and coordinate with my team members in an efficient manner. This will assist me in coordinating in a good manner with my colleagues in the MBA program and share experiences. The program will at the same time help me in broadening my perspectives with regard to the financial sector.