The act was created to protect children and Templeman regarded the arguments on the words ‘is suffering’ as a distraction from the aim. ‘This is an example of judicial practicality and desire to see justice down’ . This case illustrates that the ‘rules’ of statutory interpretation do not have to be followed exactly and are merely guidelines. Lord Templeman states that the rules of interpretation have ‘an aura of scientific authenticity about them when the reality is that interpreting any document is more of an art than a science’ . In other words, the rules can only be guidelines because judges will clearly have different interpretations.
It’s unclear how Hume thinks of names, words or language as a whole. According to Hume’s theory, we must at least have impressions (and the corresponding ideas) of the spoken or written manifestations of words. Obviously, something unites these different impressions of manifestations of a word for us to know that they are the same word with the same meaning. But under Hume’s system, we are left with a circular explanation: the concept of the word is defined by the customary application of the word to itself. Under this conception, language is not an adequate tool to determine which particulars belong within a concept.
Would you say that the current system has failed in its objectives and does not satisfactorily address organizational objectives? Analyze the existing system in regards to its ability to achieve organizational goals, induce performance in the right direction and provide incentives that motivate performance in the right areas. The work measurement system did not consider the research and publications up to some point. However later new rule was introduced: Provide incentives to those who contributed to activities that were classified as organizational priorities, like executive education and research. As
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.
In his essay, “Where I lived, and What I lived For”, Henry David Thoreau says, “Shams and delusions are esteemed for soundless truths, while reality is fabulous.” He talks about how much better life would be if people focused on reality rather than their dreams. In doing so, Thoreau appears to his audience using logic. He establishes himself as someone who has faced this type of situation before. People are caught up in ‘soundless truths’ which means that they are fooling themselves of the real truth. He says that people should not allow themselves to get their hopes up that something good is going to happen to them.
Running on Empty In his book, Running on Empty, Peterson recognizes that the hope for modifying the political incentives normally hinges on the changing and the selfish attitudes of voters who have self-interest on political process, hence engendering in vitriolic partnership (Peterson pg. 218). His proposal for the reformation of the budget processes, on the other hand, seems to be myopic, since the pork-barrel politics are disgraceful despite the fact that the reform for the budget processes was proved to be impossible. Peterson has placed a great weight concerning the present generation that is supposed by various obligations to posterity; he says that he is worried whether the social promises of today are binding on the future generation, and if it would be possible to
He eventually finds his own morals and tells himself what is right and what is wrong. Part of this realization came from him helping Jim, which troubled his mind because of what society said about helping him. But he then based his decision to help on his own experiences and logic. That is kind of what Fahrenheit 451 puts forth. But instead of trying to gain knowledge it is being destroyed, all because society is trying to promote ignorance which causes sameness in all.
In retaliation of abuse and deception, McCandless fled to find truth. McCandless could have been convicted of holding a grudge, but not selfishness. Nevertheless, when children grow old, there is a mutual urge to leave the flock. Many long to find out what the world has to offer, beyond the harboring arms of overseers. Also, opposing views may argue that, since society relies on people, Chris McCandless’ divorce from social order was selfish.
“Accepting the reality of our sinfulness means accepting our authentic self. Judas could not face his shadow; Peter could. The latter befriended the impostor within; the former raged against him.” (Brennan Manning). If someone cannot handle how society used to be in Huck Finn’s time, then they should not read the book instead of ruining it for the rest of the public. People like to criticize work that tells of historical events and does not provide authentic details, so Mark Twain would have been doing this novel an injustice by not including the N word in his book.
In some cases, dreams are not worth keeping; we need to let them go and move to other goals. Burroughs said, “they are not like spleens. There is not just one per person.” He tried to persuade us to have a self-knowledge; the ability we need to measure the possibilty to reach our dreams. As he stated, “It is not true that you can do whatever you set your mind to. It is a lie that with hard work and perseverance, you can achieve anything.” Isn’t it provoking?