While there is no guarantee of getting caught, plagiarists ultimately hurt themselves by not learning to write skillfully or think independently. Question 3: Which of the following strategies is helpful for avoiding plagiarism? a.
Non-conformity is an act of rebellion, opposing the expectations set by society. Non-conformity should be admired and admonished, valued and reproved, depending on the various situations it is applied to. I believe that non-conformity may have both positive and negative outcomes, ghastly consequences and excellent results. Those who choose not to conform either do it knowing it will result in an affirmative or negative outcome, or not knowing it what they are doing at all. In all fact, an act of non-conformity cannot be judged by its rebellious nature, but by its effects on the society or things involved.
In the hard determinist’s judgement, this feeling of freedom is an illusion. (Pereboom, 2009:324). Another argument against hard determinism would be if it were true we could not be accounted for when it comes to our actions, therefore we could do a morally wrong act and if it was determined then we would could not to blame, we did not have the free will to do that act it was determined to be done anyway. Also if we do a morally good act should we be praised for this? Hard determinists would say that it was not our free will that chose us to do this good act we were determined to do it anyway.
The three important things that should be avoided are dishonesty, not having a strong communication ethic with your partner, and having very little or even no common interest in likes, dislikes and social standings. In most cases if any of these three keys are broken it usually leads to an end of a relationship. Dishonesty can be defined as deceitfulness shown in someone's character or behavior. Therefore if one partner is dishonest to the other, the trust between two individuals is broken. Most things that is or is could said in the future can usually be questioned.
People resist change for several reasons. Some people resist change because of poor communication. The changes may not be communicated thoroughly or efficiently therefore leaving people confused and more inclined to resist; miscommunication can cause resistance. Fear of the unknown is also a reason to resist change. People may be scared to do something different because they don't know what the outcome will be; they are scared to take a chance or a risk.
It is about change. I am not particularly drawn to either method but I can see that they both have their uses. An existential approach would be of little help to a person deeply in debt and refusing to open their post, as to accept that situation would be foolish. I think in a situation where change is required such as in the example given, the cbt approach would be more helpful, as it is about setting goals and making change. However, the cbt approach would not be as helpful to a person who had experienced a situation in their lives that they had no choice but to accept, they were struggling.
A person cannot do “whatever they like” because in many cases that would include things that are actually not beneficial to them. (Doing drugs might be an example. It might seem satisfactory at the moment, but ultimately, it damages their body.) A person must only do what seems to be in their best interest. Under moral egoism, no moral duty exists to anyone other than self.
Members must overcome the need to protect themselves. One way to tell if you have trust in members they do not hold back, air dirty laundry, and admit their mistakes or weaknesses. If there is a lack of debate this indicates absence of trust. Dysfunction number two is fear of conflict. Teams that are lacking on trust are incapable of engaging in passionate debate about key issues.
The Self-Serving Bias One barrier to critical thinking is self-serving biases. I had this theory that if my actions do not need to be rationalized if the motives are good. The characteristics of others even post a threat. These situations can cause us to develop a self-serving attitude.
It is commonly believed that human emotions, and gut-feelings/intuition, interfere with rational thinking, and so when making knowledge claims, these passions should be subdued. This idea, although it may sound difficult to achieve, is one which I believe should be implemented and is absolutely justified. In essence, logic and reasoning is much more effective in making/validating knowledge claims than emotion. Foremost, logical thinking is a “system” in the human mind, which, by definition, attempts to find the smartest and most reasonable solution to a problem. Emotions, on the other hand, are instinctive thoughts built into human nature, and rely solely on an individual’s gut-feeling or intuition.