However they do have the ability to make suggestions to possibly amend the law through highlighting flaws. The judiciary cannot make judgments past the jurisdiction of the law even in interests of natural justice. A strong example of this was the Belmarsh Case, where judges believed the system of holding foreigners against the will under the anti-terrorism act contradicted with human rights. This law was subsequently changed. This could pose some doubt as to the judges power, as although they can not officially change laws, they clearly have the power to suggest changes with ease, and some could argue that despite Lord Neuberger’s claims, they do indeed undermine parliamentary sovereignty through their suggestion of changes.
Paper Number 2: Gaddis Chapter Six While reading Gaddis’ chapter six, he focused on how to question causation. He uses E.H. Carr’s fatal flaw as a big example for the distinction of “rational” and “accidental” causes. Gaddis also gives an alternative view on procedures of causation, and additional procedures historians need to keep in mind when narrate the reality of history. Carr explains rational causes as, “lead to fruitful generalizations and lessons can be learned from them.” While he says that accidental causes, “teach no lessons and lead to no conclusions.” Gaddis claims that Carr clearly confused himself as well as his readers about the differences between the two. Gaddis claims that not explaining clearly the distinction between rational and accidental causes is the more serious problem with Carr.
The aberrant perspective of Gilgamesh which I am presenting may seem divergent and atypical when analysed in accordance to our modern values and principles, but to Gilgamesh this would be quite natural. The values and ethics that contemporary readers hold shape their perspective of characters as they respond in various ways to the adventures that said characters undertake. A perfect example of this is when the narrator speaks of the state of Uruk and says “No son is left with his father, for Gilgamesh takes them all”. From this, the contemporary audience frames Gilgamesh as an immoral tyrant, as their value of free will is being challenged. However, Gilgamesh’s intentions were in the interest of the people, as he moulded the sons into warriors to protect the city.
The Disdain of Total Equality Total equality may seem fair and justifiable in the eyes of some people, but in many cases it turns out to be little more than a form of oppression, in which a group of people limit the abilities of others. Throughout the story Vonnegut speaks of this necessity for equality and the means that the government goes to achieve it by using devices called ‘handicaps’; one example of this is George’s earpiece, “A buzzer sounded in George’s head. His thoughts fled in panic, like bandits from a burglar alarm.” Vonnegut’s simile here creates a sort of loud diction, which expresses the sheer discomfort invoked by these restraints on the person wearing them. The governing body in this society views this as the solution to a problem, one that happens to be relatively impossible to solve, this is how Vonnegut incorporates satire into his story. He is poking fun at the age old concept of ‘equality,’ one that has inspired wars and movements alike; he accomplishes this by creating a system to make everyone equal, a system that happens to be just as stupid as the idea of ‘total equality.’ Under this system equality is achieved, but it is at the cost of individual freedom and a society full of stupid people, this in-turn creates the situational irony found in the story.
Presented in the argument above, the author claims that a new store should be built in Plainsville. The argument seems at first glance to be a reasonable decision. After a careful inspection, however, one will find that it suffers from several critical flaws as follows, rendering it logically unconvincing as it stands. The threshold flaw with the argument is that the author unfairly assumes residents in P (Plainsville) do highly concerned with leading healthy lives, upon which he finally draws his conclusion. Although the author offers several facts, which seems to be compelling to substantiate his conclusion, these facts actually lend little credence to the author’s claim after close scrutiny.
However, I appreciated the book’s objective as well as, a political statement regarding some realities that seemed stark and may threaten, or undermine, the economics of wellbeing, national security, as well as, the society unless they are addressed in a more effective manner. In his book, Peterson mentions Margaret Thatcher who says that it may be easy for the politicians to opt for the current gratification while they make other people pay the price for the future. However, that does not really change the reality that there is a price, since the price has a potential of being truly terrible. I do agree that the prospects of twin deficits, as mentioned by Peterson, have had some effect on the confidence, easiness, as well as on consumer and business behavior; although the effects have not yet been felt on the interest rates. The main reason for this is that the private demand for the investment capital is very weak.
Huck and Montag stand for freedom and self-reliance because they search for what is right within themselves and not what the rest do. Captain Beatty contradicts the story because he himself is really well read but heads the destruction of books. Miss Watson does this by believing in the religious and ethical values that Twain criticizes in his
It is through these ideas that composers convey the growing complacency of those who receive the truth as the value of truth is diminishing behind the shadow of personal opinion. The subjectivity of the truth is explored in Geoffrey Robertson’s “Oz” as individuals are seen to have differing interpretations of the truth. The multiple versions of the truth make it indefinite and undefined, contributing to the complexity of truth. This is reflected in the slightly different definitions of ‘obscene’ as Judge Argyle “…read to them from the Oxford English Dictionary, which said it meant… ‘indecent’. In law, that is precisely what obscene does not mean”.
The content in the work is imperative to the messages it communicates. “Take the N-word out of ‘Huckleberry Finn’ and is it still ‘Huckleberry Finn’? Probably not, after all it is a book narrated in Huck’s voice.” writes journalist Delia Lloyd about the subject. The individual ideas in the book can’t be as easily conveyed in ‘politically correct’ language. When Huck says “Jim had an uncommon level head for a nigger” the message he is conveying to the reader will be distorted if you alter what Twain originally wrote; the sentiment will not have been as accurately communicated.
Ethics Alo ETH/316 Ethics and Social Responsibility May 13, 2015 Ethics Ethical theory is an important tool required for human life. Without ethics, our actions would be purposeless. The variety of ethic theories help guide an individual’s behavior in relation to somebody Without ethics, our actions would be unplanned and irrational (Manias, Monroe, & Till, 2013, Chapter 1-7). This paper will compare similarities and differences between virtue theory, utilitarianism, and deontological ethics; ethics and morality of each theory. ETH/316AlsoAlAAlso, within is a personal experience, which explains the relationship between virtue, values, and moral concepts as they relate to one of the said theories.