He didn’t think he needed to ask Express the moral problem so that everyone will believe that his or her moral concerns have been recognized and included. * This is a moral problem because his actions of using company funds for personal use wasn’t economically efficient productive system, it didn’t produce more of the products that people most want an less use of the resources people least value, which is a definite value to society. In addition to this, his actions wasn’t informed to everyone. * Effective use of resources, What are the economic benefits? * What are the legal requirements?
In other cases, like Carr said, it does make people lazy. Instead of searching for something and reading the entire context of something to learn it, people will just look up the answer. Yes, knowing the answer is good, but knowing how to get the answer or how to get to it is almost as important. In Dewey's essay, his topic is, "Is school making us smart?". In my opinion, school itself doesn't make us smart, but it does give you the opportunity to become more knowledgable.
In this particular case, Murray does a great job sharing personal experiences upon his argument of whether there should be more vocational schools and stop using a college degree as a requirement for jobs, but stands defenseless due to the omission of statistics where only one statistic stands to defend his position. In Anglesey’s article “How Can I Incorporate Evidence into My Paper” she states that “[one needs] the author’s expertise to solidify [their] claim” which Murray does not do successfully in his paper, which ultimately weakens the evidence Murray can provide to specify his opposition and argument. Moreover, the type of evidence Murray could have recognized to portray a logical standpoint would have been to include facts of pursing high educational degrees and comparing them to those individuals searching for jobs without an efficient education. Also, including data of how past and present years have on individuals with the qualifications of education end of pursing high paying jobs. Murray could have went in so many directions rather than just providing one fact and relying on the rest of his essay on personal
I thought to myself, “how could a man whose treatises have defined the way we think to this day call others out for dictating the thoughts of others when all of his teaching have been equally as persuasive?” But as I dug deeper into the reading I realized that the reason he despised persuading the middle and lower class citizens was because he believed that they were easily persuadable, and not capable of true intellectual thought. Although the argument may be made that he was simply looking out for the middle class, I believe that his argument greatly underestimates the human ability to do what is right, and not what is necessarily the easiest
They are bitter because the author didn’t say what he was required to say. The author improvised the speech with his own ideas and talents, yet the Brotherhood considers it to be improper. The deviation from the Brotherhood’s intelligence or scientific approach is the main cause of the internal conflict. Perhaps, the author just wants to be free, saying whatever he feels to be right and careless about following a standard. “I could glimpse the possibility of being more than a member of a race.” (308) The author has devoted himself to the betterment of his people, either by going to college/ accepting the white way of life or speaking in front of other people.
In order to have a friendship that works or is healthy you have to argue sometimes to better understand the other person. This includes taking the time to see the full picture from time to time and actually setting yourself and your feelings aside for someone else. For example, if a friend told me he was having trouble concentrating on his studies and I just told him everything he was doing wrong that wouldn’t benefit him at all. However, if instead of throwing all my advice on him I just listen and ask questions I could see the complete picture and understand what the problem could be I could offer some help. This gives him confidence and allows him to be able to work on the problem without feeling ashamed.
Contrary to the District’s contention, the record also does not show that the Association indicated that it could not beat the savings under a subcontract. In support of its contention, the District submits that the Association’s chief negotiator (Mr. Kurtz) admitted to the District’s business administrator (Mr. Richards) that the Association could not meet the terms of the subcontract and that the Association did not request further negotiations after the District declared an impasse. According to Mr. Richards, however, Mr. Kurtz said, “Yes, the numbers, they’re showing a savings for the District” (N.T. 145), which is hardly an indication that the Association could not beat the savings under the subcontract. Mr. Richards also testified that Mr. Kurtz “didn’t feel that the Association could, in fact, come up with that type of savings, but the negotiations still had to move forward.” Id.
Farhad then asks if Daniel has a friend that replaces doors Daniel tells Farhad that he does not and that Farhad needs to call someone else that fixes doors. Farhad assumes that Daniel is trying to cheat him because even though Daniel replaced the lock but did not fix the door that he did not do his job. Because of the communication display of Farhad toward Daniel, Farhad did not effectively accomplish what he wanted. (Haggis, 2004) The matter could have been easily handled effectively if Daniel maybe could have used nonverbal communication by showing him what he did and explained that the lock was replaced and that it’s not the lock but, his door that needs to be fixed. “When you communicate with others, one way to minimize misunderstandings is to increase your awareness of the intentions of your messages and the possible interpretations of your words.
Socrates questioned life and its values. He developed the Socratic Method, which was learning by asking questions. He encouraged people to analyze their answers to develop understanding. This analysis allowed people to strip away what they were taught by others, and get a new idea or truth. The Athenian government disapproved of Socrates' philosophies because they thought he corrupted the minds of the youth and that he didn't respect the Greek gods.
According to Fish, reasons for resisting the apology movement are very plain. Fish states “after so many years, an apology would be merely ceremonial and nothing more than a ‘feel good’ gesture” (469). Fish does not agree with the idea that just because no one is alive today that made the decision about slavery, that there should be no apology. Members of the Supreme Court are responsible for their predecessors’ actions as they carry on their work. According to Fish, it is the Supreme Court’s job to correct any wrong that was done in the past.