Narrative- Amazon Woman Essay examples -- Personal Narrative Writing

Narrative- Amazon Woman I need to recover a rhythm in my heart that moves my body first and my mind second, that allows my soul to catch up with me. I need to take a sacred pause, as if I were a sun-warmed rock in the center of a rushing river. I am crouching still near a tree on a loamy ridge, my two hands spread around the trunk. I am feeling grateful for this tree that I remember because of its mossy smell and thick crevassed bark. It tells me that the beaver pond is near where one white pine shoots 100 feet up out of the tannic water, which means I am close to camp and food and sleep. I get to the pond’s edge, across from the point where my tent sits. There are no trails and the boreal forest is thick with scrub pine and dead-fall. Early afternoon sun brings out the wave of deer flies; I shake my head so that my two braids might hit the little buggers in mid-air. Undeterred, one begins to chew on my shoulder blade and prickers dig into my shins. I can see my tent across the pond, 100 yards as the crow flies, probably a mile walk around the edge. I decide to take off my clothes, leave them on this rock by the shore, swim across and come back for my things later in my canoe. Even though the whine of the deer flies’ wings beating around my head intensifies, I just stare at the water. It is only two feet deep here at the edge, but it is so dark that I cannot see the bottom. Darker shapes appear as I stare, including a large fallen pine tree which leads from the shore and disappears into the darkness. A fear takes hold of me, as it does every time I conte mplate diving into this dark water. I shake my head to loosen its grip, feel a deer fly land on the small of my back and I dive. I swim as hard as I can, my heart bang... ...Today I am smiling wide and proud of this body that carried boat and gear down to the water’s edge; that paddled against the wind across the bay to the foot of the wetland stream. The body that hoisted the laden canoe over five beaver damns, that carried boat and canoe up the trail for a mile to the secret pond; that sleeps comfortably in a tent alone out here listening to the hoot owl, and the loons and the cacophony of bullfrog music; the body that jerks upright at midnight with the sound of a buck’s snort and heavy stomp of his hoof; the body that gets up early and bushwhacks to the top of the mountain. I lie down on the warm rock at the edge of the pond and I close my eyes. My breath feels easy and light, my belly is soft and where a hard gnarled knot used to be under my sternum, a warmth spreads beyond my skin, around the blue sky and sun and back in again.

Why People Commit Crime

Tyler Hertz CRJ 308 10. 28. 2012 Why People Commit Crime How do people define crime? Some might define crime as an act of offence towards the morality of humans. Others might regard crime as an act that harms the universal human rights. In my perspectives, I think that crime is an offence made towards the law. Therefore, why do people still commit crimes? There are many reasons why people may commit crimes and it depends on the type of person they are. Many people will commit a crime everyday whether it be speeding, J-walking, or in some cases, theft and murder.Some crimes are easy to commit and that’s why I think people commit them. I also, refer to the Routine Activities theory. This theory, I believe, does a great job on explaining why people commit most crimes. It says that in order for a crime to be committed three things must have to occur and those being; a motivated offender, lack of a capable guardian, and suitable target. Why I think this does a good job in explain w hy people commit a crime is because it goes into detail about all aspects that involve a crime taking place.Take speeding for example, a person who is in a hurry will speed; this makes them the motivated offender. Next, for this crime to take place there must be a suitable target and this could be any road that is not congested by traffic. Last, we have the lack of a capable guardian and this is an obvious one, it would be not visible Law Enforcement officers on the highway. If all these are possible a person can and most likely will speed. Speeding is not really considered by most to be a really crime but, more of a criminal act.I just wanted to show how that theory can explain most types of crimes and it will work even for other crimes. I believe there is a huge difference between a crime and a criminal act. I believe a crime to be something that causes harm to others. Speeding, although can, does not usually cause any harm to others, this is what I consider a criminal act. A crim e would be something like assault or theft. Theft does not cause physical harm but, finaical and emotional harm to the victims. Why do people do it?Another reason I believe people commit crimes is because of greed. Greed is the wanting to lead a luxurious life or even to own something that is beyond one’s financial budget. For example, a person of moderate income would like to own an expensive plasma television which the price is beyond his budget. However, his greed prompts him to own that item by either stealing money to purchase it or to steal the item itself. When the person gets caught by any law enforcer, the person will be charged in court for committing a crime.To steal to fulfill one’s desire to own an item which one understands that it is beyond his financial budget is committing a crime by the cause of greed. This, in my view, shows that people commit crimes for selfish reason. In conclusion, I believe that most people will commit a crime either because they can and it is easy or because they have the selfish vision of living a life they cannot afford to live so they will do anything they can to achieve it, even if that means breaking the law and causing harm to others.

Theory of Mercantilism

Theory of Mercantilism Most of the European economists who wrote between 1500 and 1750 are today generally considered mercantilists; this term was initially used solely by critics, such as Mirabeau and Smith, but was quickly adopted by historians. Originally the standard English term was â€Å"mercantile system†. The word â€Å"mercantilism† was introduced into English from German in the early 19th century. The bulk of what is commonly called â€Å"mercantilist literature† appeared in the 1620s in Great Britain. 6] Smith saw English merchant Thomas Mun (1571–1641) as a major creator of the mercantile system, especially in his posthumously published Treasure by Foreign Trade (1664), which Smith considered the archetype or manifesto of the movement. [7] Perhaps the last major mercantilist work was James Steuart’s Principles of Political Economy published in 1767. [8] â€Å"Mercantilist literature† also extended beyond England. For example, Ital y, France, and Spain produced noted writers of mercantilist themes including Italy's Giovanni Botero (1544–1617) and Antonio Serra (1580-? ; France's, Jean Bodin, Colbert and other physiocrats. Themes also existed in writers from the German historical school from List, as well as followers of the â€Å"American system† and British â€Å"free-trade imperialism,† thus stretching the system into the 19th century. However, many British writers, including Mun and Misselden, were merchants, while many of the writers from other countries were public officials. Beyond mercantilism as a way of understanding the wealth and power of nations, Mun and Misselden are noted for their viewpoints on a wide range of economic matters. [9] Merchants in VeniceThe Austrian lawyer and scholar Philipp Wilhelm von Hornick, in his Austria Over All, If She Only Will of 1684, detailed a nine-point program of what he deemed effective national economy, which sums up the tenets of mercantilism comprehensively:[10] That every inch of a country's soil be utilized for agriculture, mining or manufacturing. That all raw materials found in a country be used in domestic manufacture, since finished goods have a higher value than raw materials. That a large, working population be encouraged. That all export of gold and silver be prohibited and all domestic money be kept in circulation.That all imports of foreign goods be discouraged as much as possible. That where certain imports are indispensable they be obtained at first hand, in exchange for other domestic goods instead of gold and silver. That as much as possible, imports be confined to raw materials that can be finished [in the home country]. That opportunities be constantly sought for selling a country's surplus manufactures to foreigners, so far as necessary, for gold and silver. That no importation be allowed if such goods are sufficiently and suitably supplied at home.Other than Von Hornick, there were no mercantilist wr iters presenting an overarching scheme for the ideal economy, as Adam Smith would later do for classical economics. Rather, each mercantilist writer tended to focus on a single area of the economy. [11] Only later did non-mercantilist scholars integrate these â€Å"diverse† ideas into what they called mercantilism. Some scholars thus reject the idea of mercantilism completely, arguing that it gives â€Å"a false unity to disparate events†. Smith saw the mercantile system as an enormous conspiracy by manufacturers and merchants against consumers, a view that has led some authors, especially Robert E.Ekelund and Robert D. Tollison to call mercantilism â€Å"a rent-seeking society†. To a certain extent, mercantilist doctrine itself made a general theory of economics impossible. Mercantilists viewed the economic system as a zero-sum game, in which any gain by one party required a loss by another. [12] Thus, any system of policies that benefited one group would by de finition harm the other, and there was no possibility of economics being used to maximize the â€Å"commonwealth†, or common good. [13] Mercantilists' writings were also generally created to rationalize particular practices rather than as investigations into the best policies. 14] Mercantilist domestic policy was more fragmented than its trade policy. While Adam Smith portrayed mercantilism as supportive of strict controls over the economy, many mercantilists disagreed. The early modern era was one of letters patent and government-imposed monopolies; some mercantilists supported these, but others acknowledged the corruption and inefficiency of such systems. Many mercantilists also realized that the inevitable results of quotas and price ceilings were black markets.One notion mercantilists widely agreed upon was the need for economic oppression of the working population; laborers and farmers were to live at the â€Å"margins of subsistence†. The goal was to maximize pro duction, with no concern for consumption. Extra money, free time, or education for the â€Å"lower classes† was seen to inevitably lead to vice and laziness, and would result in harm to the economy. [15] Infinite growth The mercantilists saw a large population as a form of wealth which made possible the development of bigger markets and armies. The opposing doctrine of physiocracy predicted that mankind would outgrow its resources.Origins Scholars debate over why mercantilism dominated economic ideology for 250 years. [16] One group, represented by Jacob Viner, argues that mercantilism was simply a straightforward, common-sense system whose logical fallacies could not be discovered by the people of the time, as they simply lacked the required analytical tools. The second school, supported by scholars such as Robert B. Ekelund, contends that mercantilism was not a mistake, but rather the best possible system for those who developed it. This school argues that mercantilist poli cies were developed and enforced by rent-seeking merchants and governments.Merchants benefited greatly from the enforced monopolies, bans on foreign competition, and poverty of the workers. Governments benefited from the high tariffs and payments from the merchants. Whereas later economic ideas were often developed by academics and philosophers, almost all mercantilist writers were merchants or government officials. [17] Monetarism offers a third explanation for mercantilism. European trade exported bullion to pay for goods from Asia, thus reducing the money supply and putting downward pressure on prices and economic activity.The evidence for this hypothesis is the lack of inflation in the English economy until the Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars when paper money was extensively used. A fourth explanation lies in the increasing professionalisation and technification of the wars of the era, which turned the maintenance of adequate reserve funds (in the prospect of war) into a more and more expensive and eventually competitive business. Mercantilism developed at a time when the European economy was in transition. Isolated feudal estates were being replaced by centralized nation-states as the focus of power.Technological changes in shipping and the growth of urban centres led to a rapid increase in international trade. [18] Mercantilism focused on how this trade could best aid the states. Another important change was the introduction of double-entry bookkeeping and modern accounting. This accounting made extremely clear the inflow and outflow of trade, contributing to the close scrutiny given to the balance of trade. [19] Of course, the impact of the discovery of America cannot be ignored. New markets and new mines propelled foreign trade to previously inconceivable heights.The latter led to â€Å"the great upward movement in prices† and an increase in â€Å"the volume of merchant activity itself. †[20] Prior to mercantilism, the most important ec onomic work done in Europe was by the medieval scholastic theorists. The goal of these thinkers was to find an economic system that was compatible with Christian doctrines of piety and justice. They focused mainly on microeconomics and local exchanges between individuals. Mercantilism was closely aligned with the other theories and ideas that were replacing the medieval worldview.This period saw the adoption of the very Machiavellian realpolitik and the primacy of the raison d'etat in international relations. The mercantilist idea that all trade was a zero sum game, in which each side was trying to best the other in a ruthless competition, was integrated into the works of Thomas Hobbes. The dark view of human nature also fit well with the Puritan view of the world, and some of the most stridently mercantilist legislation, such as the Navigation Acts, were enacted by the government of Oliver Cromwell. [21] PoliciesFrench finance minister and mercantilist Jean-Baptiste Colbert served for over 20 years. Mercantilist ideas were the dominant economic ideology of all of Europe in the early modern period, and most states embraced it to a certain degree. Mercantilism was centred in England and France, and it was in these states that mercantilist polices were most often enacted. France Mercantilism arose in France in the early 16th century, soon after the monarchy had become the dominant force in French politics. In 1539, an important decree banned the importation of woolen goods from Spain and some parts of Flanders.The next year, a number of restrictions were imposed on the export of bullion. [22] Over the rest of the sixteenth century further protectionist measures were introduced. The height of French mercantilism is closely associated with Jean-Baptiste Colbert, finance minister for 22 years in the 17th century, to the extent that French mercantilism is sometimes called Colbertism. Under Colbert, the French government became deeply involved in the economy in order to increase exports. Protectionist policies were enacted that limited imports and favored exports.Industries were organized into guilds and monopolies, and production was regulated by the state through a series of over a thousand directives outlining how different products should be produced. [23] To encourage industry, foreign artisans and craftsmen were imported. Colbert also worked to decrease internal barriers to trade, reducing internal tariffs and building an extensive network of roads and canals. Colbert's policies were quite successful, and France's industrial output and economy grew considerably during this period, as France became the dominant European power.He was less successful in turning France into a major trading power, and Britain and the Netherlands remained supreme in this field. [23] Great Britain In England, mercantilism reached its peak during the 1340-1789 Long Parliament government (1640–1660). Mercantilist policies were also embraced throughout much of the Tudor and Stuart periods, with Robert Walpole being another major proponent. In Britain, government control over the domestic economy was far less extensive than on the Continent, limited by common law and the steadily increasing power of Parliament. 24] Government-controlled monopolies were common, especially before the English Civil War, but were often controversial. [25] The Anglo-Dutch Wars were fought between the English and the Dutch for control over the seas and trade routes. With respect to its colonies, British mercantilism meant that the government and the merchants became partners with the goal of increasing political power and private wealth, to the exclusion of other empires. The government protected its merchants—and kept others out—by trade barriers, regulations, and subsidies to domestic industries in order to maximize exports from and minimize imports to the realm.The government had to fight smuggling—which became a favorite American tech nique in the 18th century to circumvent the restrictions on trading with the French, Spanish or Dutch. The goal of mercantilism was to run trade surpluses, so that gold and silver would pour into London. The government took its share through duties and taxes, with the remainder going to merchants in Britain. The government spent much of its revenue on a superb Royal Navy, which not only protected the British colonies but threatened the colonies of the other empires, and sometimes seized them. Thus the British Navy captured New Amsterdam (New York) in 1664.The colonies were captive markets for British industry, and the goal was to enrich the mother country. [26] British mercantilist writers were themselves divided on whether domestic controls were necessary. British mercantilism thus mainly took the form of efforts to control trade. A wide array of regulations was put in place to encourage exports and discourage imports. Tariffs were placed on imports and bounties given for exports, and the export of some raw materials was banned completely. The Navigation Acts expelled foreign merchants from England's domestic trade.The nation aggressively sought colonies and once under British control, regulations were imposed that allowed the colony to only produce raw materials and to only trade with Britain. This led to friction with the inhabitants of these colonies, and mercantilist policies (such as forbidding trade with other empires and controls over smuggling) were a major irritant leading to the American Revolution. Over all, however, mercantilist policies had a positive impact on Britain helping turn it into the world's dominant trader, and an international superpower[citation needed].One domestic policy that had a lasting impact was the conversion of â€Å"waste lands† to agricultural use. Mercantilists felt that to maximize a nation's power all land and resources had to be used to their utmost, and this era thus saw projects like the draining of The Fens. [27] Mercantilism helped create trade patterns such as the triangular trade in the North Atlantic, in which raw materials were imported to the metropolis and then processed and redistributed to other colonies. Other countries The other nations of Europe also embraced mercantilism to varying degrees.The Netherlands, which had become the financial centre of Europe by being its most efficient trader, had little interest in seeing trade restricted and adopted few mercantilist policies. Mercantilism became prominent in Central Europe and Scandinavia after the Thirty Years' War (1618–1648), with Christina of Sweden, Jacob Kettler of Courland, Christian IV of Denmark being notable proponents. The Habsburg Holy Roman Emperors had long been interested in mercantilist policies, but the vast and decentralized nature of their empire made implementing such notions difficult.Some constituent states of the empire did embrace Mercantilism, most notably Prussia, which under Frederick the Grea t had perhaps the most rigidly controlled economy in Europe. During the economic collapse of the seventeenth century Spain had little coherent economic policy, but French mercantilist policies were imported by Philip V with some success. Russia under Peter I (Peter the Great) attempted to pursue mercantilism, but had little success because of Russia's lack of a large merchant class or an industrial base.Wars and imperialism Mercantilism was economic warfare and was well suited to an era of military warfare. [28] Since the level of world trade was viewed as fixed, it followed that the only way to increase a nation's trade was to take it from another. A number of wars, most notably the Anglo-Dutch Wars and the Franco-Dutch Wars, can be linked directly to mercantilist theories. Most wars had other causes but they reinforced mercantilism by clearly defining the enemy, and justified damage to the enemy's economy.Mercantilism fueled the imperialism of this era, as many nations expended si gnificant effort to build new colonies that would be sources of gold (as in Mexico) or sugar (as in the West Indies), as well as becoming exclusive markets. European power spread around the globe, often under the aegis of companies with government-guaranteed monopolies in certain defined geographical regions, such as the Dutch East India Company or the British Hudson's Bay Company (operating in present-day Canada).

Game Theory †Descriptive, Normative or Prescriptive Essay

Going through life we often are surprised by the different ways how people think, make decisions and interact. We believe that most of us are rational human beans (to some extent) and, therefore, our decisions should be grounded in analysis of the situation, our experience and intuition. Therefore, the human mind can be seen as an incredibly complicated machine that runs series of theoretical simulations of possible situations (often subconsciously) to find the most optimal course of action, taking into consideration the possible strategies of others. When the decisions are important to us and the reasoning process is conscious, we engage in strategic thinking. It has always been tempting to develop a theory that would actually explain and predict the human interaction based on strategic thinking, therefore making the strategic decision making more effective to both parties and without risk to going into â€Å"worst case scenario†. Therefore ideally game theory should cover the questions how the decisions should be made in order to maximize the gains, what reasoning does it imply, how to make the best choice of strategy and what will the pay-offs be for both parties. What questions does game theory actually answer – this is how the topic of this essay might be rephrased. In this essay the discussion will be focused on the question whether game theory is a descriptive, normative or prescriptive theory. First, a brief explanation of different types of theories should be given as well as the definition of game theory and the development in this academic field of study as well as the practical applications. Then the standpoint of the author will be defined and supporting as well as contradicting arguments based on various academic articles will be presented and discussed. The last part of the essay will sum up the discussed ideas and draw the final conclusions and remarks. To start with the necessary in-depth understanding of the essay topic, the distinction between normative, descriptive and prescriptive theories should be clarified. As it is known, normative theory deals with how things should be – what ought to be in context of the specific field of study. Descriptive theories are concerned with explaining the way things happen (people behave) in real ife, moreover the prescriptive theories aim to suggest how things should happen (or how people should react) and this could be just on theoretical level or also connected with the real life (therefore not only giving prescriptions on how to act but also the predictions on the future situations). Joseph B. Kadane and Patrick D. Larkey in their paper „The Confusion of Is and Ought in Game Theoretic Contexts† from 1983 reflects on the essay topic and distinguishes between different types of normative and positive theories: Among positive theories, we distinguish three types. Descriptive theories are concerned with empirical phenomena, but stop with a description. Explanatory theories go further by addressing â€Å"why questions. † Finally, predictive theories discuss what behavior will be. We also distinguish between two types of normative theory, both concerned with what behavior should be. Speculative statements are nonoperational usually consisting of a goal or criterion (e. g. , maximize utility or profit) with no precise instructions on how one might accomplish the goal or apply the criterion. Prescriptions are operational in that they give both a goal (or criterion) and feasible procedures (an algorithm) for accomplishing it. From this quotation it can be clearly seen what theory distinctions in game theory context are made. The essay author will adopt this view and within normative theories take into consideration both speculative and prescriptive types of theories, within descriptive theories include both descriptive and explanatory types and within prescriptive theories look at predictive and prescriptive (for real life situations) types. After clarifying the different types of theories in connection with game theory, the short description of game theory and development of modern game theory will be given. In the Oxford English dictionary the definition of game theory is as follows the branch of mathematics concerned with the analysis of strategies for dealing with competitive situations where the outcome of a participant’s choice of action depends critically on the actions of other participants. Game theory has been applied to contexts in war, business, and biology. From the definition we see the important factors are the mathematical analysis, different strategic options with different outcomes (pay-offs) and the interdependence of the players. Therefore it indeed looks like the so desired theory described in the introduction of the essay, however, what does it actually deliver, that is the main focus of this essay. Modern game theory has been developing now for more than 50 years since the book Theory of Games and Economic Behavior by John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern was published in 1944. However, it must be noted that some important efforts in explaining the strategic choices – strategic decision making has been done also before, for example by Zermelo. Konong, Kalmar and Borel. Game theory has evolved considerably since the publication of von Neuman and Morgenstern’s book and what is interesting the theory has developed far beyond its initial mathematical boundaries. This is due in a large part to contributions in the 1950s from John Nash (1950, 1951). However, it was in the 1970s that game theory as a way of analysing strategic situations began to be applied in all sorts of diverse areas including economics, politics, international relations, business and biology (Chermichael, 2005). By having established the understanding about the subject of the essay, the arguments can now be presented. The author believes that the game theory at the stage of evolution it is now in is a descriptive and prescriptive theory concerning strategic decision making, however with some limitations. Argument 1: Strategic decision making implies / do not imply rational thinking The first contra argument discussed will be about the assumption of game theory that the players are rational. It can be argued that this indeed does not reflect real life as people often make irrational choices and therefore game theory is not describing the real world nor giving prescriptions on how to act in real situations but is indeed a normative theory. What needs to be emphasized here is that the essay author argues that game theory is a prescriptive theory when dealing with strategic decision making. Strategic decision making involves long term commitments from an organization and therefore it will be carefully analyzed and discussed before the final decision, in order to be sure that the chosen course of action will deliver the highest possible results. Following this thought it can be concluded that the players will act rationally, as they are aware of the huge impact of the decision and have certain decision making skills (which can be assumed as they are high in the organizational hierarchy that they are the ones making strategic decisions). Argument 2: Game theory does / does not describe predict the real world situations Strong critique regarding the interpretation of game theory is expressed by Rubinstein (1991): There exists a widespread myth in game theory, that it is possible to achieve a miraculous prediction regarding the outcome of interaction among human beings using only data on the order of events, combined with a description of the players’ preferences over the feasible outcomes of the situation. [.. ]The mystical and vague word â€Å"rationality† is used to fuel our hopes of achieving this goal. I fail to see any possibility of this being accomplished. Overall, game theory accomplishes only two tasks: It builds models based on intuition and uses deductive arguments based on mathematical knowledge. As we see from this quotation, Rubinstein is critical regarding the game theory having any descriptive or prescriptive characteristics. However, he states that what is missing for it to be a descriptive (and following that prescriptive theory), is the data describing the process of reasoning adopted by the players when they analyze a game. Since this article more than 10 both scientific and empirical articles have been written directly dealing with the problems mentioned in this article therefore the interpretation has evolved as well as the game theory itself. Moreover, game theory has been used throughout the years by companies and has been proven to be a useful tool for strategists. Camerer in his article â€Å"Does strategy research need game theory? (1991) comes to a conclusion that a common criticism that game-theoretic models assume too much rationality is often wrong because first, some games require little rationality to compute equilibria; and second, players may reach an equilibrium by communicating, adapting or evolving to it rather than by calculating it. Indeed, the author agrees that the interpretation of the games needs careful attention, however, the theory can be used as a descriptive theory for strategic decisions and by studying it strategists can come to a better decisions therefore evolving in a prescriptive theory. Another extra point enhancing the previously stated is the evolution of game theory now including cooperation, asymmetric information and other factors which are present in real life situations. Hutton (1996) describes game theory as an intellectual framework for examining what various parties to a decision should do given their possession of inadequate information and different objectives. Here we see that in later works game theory is seen as a more sophisticated theory dealing with various situations not only basic theoretic models. The paper of Kadane and Larkey from 1983 states two suggestions in order to clear the â€Å"is and ought† confusion. First, a Bayesian perspective should be adopted, second, more attention should be given to the model validation. The Bayesian view of games clarifies the proper, respective roles of prescriptive and predictive theory. Taking the Bayesian norm as prescriptively compelling for my play leads me to want the best description I can find of my partner/opponent’s play. Thus both prescription and description have important roles to play in the Bayesian view of games. Therefore, we see that through Bayesian approach the descriptive and prescriptive characteristics of game theory are enhanced. From authors research for relevant literature concerning the question what type of theory is game theory, it can be seen that most papers concerning these questions are around 1980`s and the beginning of 1990`s. Later papers on game theory, however, are more concerned of empirical applications of game theory as well as in depth analysis of the theory. The empirical work in such fields as auctions, M&A, price strategy, marketing strategy etc. as been applying successfully the principles of game theory, therefore strengthening the statement that Game theory is indeed now a descriptive and prescriptive type of theory. Argument 3: Game theorist work has been internationally recognized as applicable to real life and practically useful to make better strategies and strategic decisions Another strong argument supporting the statement of the author is the work of rec ent Nobel Prize winners in economics, in 2007 and in 2012 the winners are game theorists Leonid Hurwicz, Eric Maskin, Roger Myerson and Lloyd Shapley, Alvin Roth respectively. (Nobel Prizes in economics also was awarded to game theorists in 1994, 1995 and 2005). Leonid Hurwicz, Eric Maskin and Roger Myerson won the 2007 Nobel Prize for their work in mechanism design theory, a branch of game theory that extends the application of game theory to how different types of rules, or institutions, align individual incentives with overall social goals. Their work on allocation mechanisms has had a significant impact on the design of uctions, social welfare systems and many organizations. As the theory can be applied successfully to real fields of business and real organizations, it can be concluded that game theory must be a prescriptive and therefore also descriptive theory. Moreover, the Nobel Prize in 2012 to Shapley and Lloyd was awarded for the theory of stable allocations and the practice of market design – the creation of the link from theory to practice. BBC article (15. 10. 012) regarding the winners of 2012 Nobel Prize in economics by Stephanie Flanders, the BBC Economics Editor, states The work of Lloyd Shapley and Alvin Roth reminds us that economics can be both deeply mathematical and abstract, and deeply practical – not to say hugely useful to public and private organizations all over the world. [.. ] In the past 50 years, game theorists – and micro-economics in general – have genuinely made the world a better place. Either they have helped to solve practical real-world problems or, where there is no solution, they have helped us to understand the issues more clearly. So once again we see that game theory when applied correctly can help to solve real life problems and therefore is a prescriptive and descriptive theory. Working on the essay the author read through many articles on game theory including the classic papers of Nash (1950,1951) where the theory is explained in detail but applications explained are indeed rather simple and not that applicable to complex real world situations, however, very useful for simple situations. Looking at the research papers written in late 1990`s and 2000`s, the empirical applications can be seen more clear and grounded in real life. The critique on game theory expressed by researchers in early 1990`s have been taken into consideration therefore helping the game theory to evolve ad become descriptive and prescriptive theory that can be applied to many fields. Moreover, practitioners are indeed using game theory, for example highly successful consultancy company McKinsey is using game theory to help managers make better decisions and foresee the different possible risks of different courses of action (Hagen Lindstadt and Jurgen Muller, 2009). The author believes that the game theory has evolved from being more a normative theory to normative prescriptive theory, then by applying these rules to real world descriptive theory has been developed, and now in hand of a masterful strategist game theory is indeed a predictive and prescriptive theory helping to make better strategic decisions.

A Study On A Structural Necessity Architecture Essay

The necessity of construction is barely a simple topic. Discussions on the subject have ranged from Levi-Strauss ‘ accounts of infrastructures which exist beyond our ability to straight grok, to unite world-systems such as Wallerstein proposed, and of class the counter statements against such a incorporate system much like Mintz ‘ offered. Indeed depending on our definition of ‘necessity ‘ and ‘structure ‘ the form and range of such statement can go radically different. Within the societal scientific disciplines the term construction besides seems have different options. At possibly the most cardinal degree, within the field, the societal scientific disciplines themselves are broken into separate subjects in an attempt to decently analyze, analyse, and categorise different types of information, therefore supplying a sense of order or construction. Yet even these divisions are inconsistent across the field. At one institute sociology and anthropology may be joined in a individual plan of survey yet at others they are wholly separate and possibly assorted with another, such as linguistics. Beyond specifying itself the societal scientific disciplines have a singular ability for classifying, reclassifying, and re-reclassifying things ( including but barely limited to race, civilization, historical periods, theoretical models, methodological analysiss, and gender ) on a regular footing. In 1978, Edward Said, in his book Orientalism, identified a really controversial division between Europe and the Orient. Since so there have been important arguments on the ground for such a division, and even if such a division genuinely existed. Janet Abu-Lughod, in 1989 wrote â€Å" Analyzing a System in Formation † , in which she agreed that there is a recognizable division between the Europe and the remainder of the universe. Indeed she suggests that there is a incorporate universe construction and it is based on a Eurocentric theoretical account which developed around the 14th century. Within societal scientific disciplines this of course raises the inquiry, is the strong accent we give to construction an unconscious affect of the Eurocentric beginning of our theoretical account? Or is construction a more permeant thought? This essay contends that while a big part of the authorship in societal scientific discipline literature is Eurocentric in beginning, the construction, and more specifically the thought of construction is non limited to European idea. Levi-Strauss ‘ thoughts of infrastructure offers a strong statement that construction, as Abu-Lughod describes it, is simply the superstructure representation of an implicit in infrastructure common throughout all human civilizations. Then before turn toing the signifier of construction in the superstructure of our modern universe system, we must inquire whether determine whether construction is needed, or instead can we gestate of a universe, or societal scientific disciplines, without construction? Finally, manners of communicating will be used to demo how construction is exhaustively embedded in our universe even when it is non perceived. InAnalyzing a System in Formation, Janet Abu-Lughod really indicates her beliefs that the current construction of societal scientific disciplines is dominated by its European beginnings. Indeed while citing others, she gives provinces that the current universe system is wholly Eurocentric. For illustration, she recognizes Immanuel Wallerstein for coining the term â€Å" modern world-system † and that Europe lead development of this system, which has lasted more than 500 old ages. ( Abu-Lughod, 4 ) She supports this contention with the plants of Fernand Braudel and Eric Wolff who describe how a euro-centered universe was established in the 14th century and was the footing for the current universe system. ( Abu-Lughod, 9 ) Indeed, she accuses Braudel of doing an â€Å" unconscious Eurocentric faux pas. † ( Abu-Lughod, 11 ) In these illustrations the thought of Eurocentrism is difficult to lose. As Abu-Lughod points out, â€Å" Before Europe becameoneof the world-economies in the twelfth and 13th centuries†¦ there were legion pre-existent world-economies. † ( 12 ) Looking at the modern system it is possibly excessively easy to see the strength of the European influence upon the system, whether in currency rates, human rights issues, or a assortment of other countries. But to state that the modern system is purely based on this influence suggests that all other systems have either been discarded or go subservient to the Euro-centric theoretical account. Yet we have merely to come in a non-European state to recognize merely how diverse the differences elsewhere remain. Surely the strong grades of European influences are felt in South Africa or India, where English is widely spoken. And similarly in Algeria and Egypt where Arabic is still the national linguistic communication but a turning per centum of the population speak French and English, severally. Yet in each instance, although they have adopted parts of the Euro-centric theoretical account, they have each molded their ain signifier. Rather than being consumed Europe they have been influenced by it. But the influence is non unidimensional, instead influences flow back and Forth between parts. The ongoing argument in France sing hijab and other spiritual symbols in public schools is declarative of the concern felt by many in France of the turning Muslim population. Likewise, the alterations in corporate leading methods over the past decennary, from individualistic to more group-oriented, reflect an inflow of new thoughts from Japan and other states in Southeast Asia. In the terminal, Abu-Lughod was at least partly right ; Europe has influenced the construction of the world-system. But the world-system, and including Europe, has been influenced by the remainder of the universe. In a similar mode, while the construction of societal scientific disciplines found its beginnings in Europe it has, particularly in recent decennaries, been strongly influenced by the remainder of the universe. The construction that remains is non a massive creative activity but instead an merger which is invariably in flux. Leading possibly to the inevitable inquiry, are we utilizing the right, or the best system? Or do we even need to make this construction? When composingThe Ritual Processin 1969 Victor Turner gave us the term ‘anti-structure ‘ . His term was non meant to connote a deficiency of construction. In â€Å" Metaphors of Anti-Structure in Religious Culture † he clarified his term stating, â€Å" †¦ the ‘anti ‘ is here merely used strategically and does non connote a extremist negativeness. † ( 272 ) He farther explains, â€Å" I do non seek the obliteration of affair by signifier. † ( 273 ) Rather than proposing non-structure, the term anti-structure is conceived as yet another portion of the whole non to the full accounted for within the bing construction ; they are two-sides of the same coin. Within societal scientific disciplines as a whole at that place ever seems to be a construction. Disciplines are broken down by topics or methods. Subjects are broken down by location or clip period. Information is so pigeon-holed into a peculiar subject within a topic under a subject. Sometimes these topics and subjects are realigned, and sometimes information is referenced in multiple topographic points, but there is consistent effort to happen a topographic point everything ; or as the expression goes, â€Å" A topographic point for everything and everything in its topographic point. † But why must everything be put in its topographic point? And is there truly a topographic point for everything? Historically, our classification systems last until something does n't suit. After seeking legion unsuccessful ways to accommodate our theoretical account and our information we acknowledge the job and expression for a new construction ; what sociology of cognition would cal cubic decimeter a revolution of cognition. But is a construction necessary? Can we gestate of our societal scientific discipline information outside the restraints of construction? If it is possible, we do we invariably seek to develop a more accurate and/or effectual construction? One might reason that early ethnographers, such as Marco Polo and Sir Richard Francis Burton worked outside the restraints of construction. They successfully documented important information without being purely attached to a peculiar subject. Indeed such plants frequently contain a wealth of information because they include a great assortment of different types of information. In a similar mode Clifford Geertz ‘ experience as described inDeep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfightcan be viewed as working outside the constituted construction. His intended survey was, no uncertainty, sanctioned and developed along certain guidelines. However, when he allowed himself to be caught up in rabble outlook brought on by the sudden reaching of the constabulary he was non moving within the restraints of any guidelines. Indeed Geertz ‘ description of the police officer ‘s action on page 415 suggest that he was movingagainstthe established construction. When we read about the Balinese cockfight and implicit in construction is easy to individuality. Peopless are identified by originals and specific subjects are ethical motives are indicated. The analysis itself is really structured, and that is where the construction seems to fall within much of the societal scientific disciplines, particularly anthropology. In order to pass on the information to others we construction it in such as manner that it becomes relevant to our audience. Yet the existent assemblage of information, though possibly limited by a pre-defined field site and research inquiries, can be a non-structured action. In my research of the effects of nomadic communicating engineerings, I frequently find it hard to non see a construction. Due to my experience working on the mechanical side of the engineering, I frequently construction the engineerings, and thereby the people, without detecting. A adult male in a suit utilizing a Blackberry phone seems is deemed a concern adult male, while a similar adult male have oning denims and utilizing an iPhone is deemed a college pupil. Likewise, person utilizing Linux is considered more technologically savvy than person utilizing Windows or an Apple OS, irrespective of their existent competency. From a proficient position, nomadic phones require a physical web to enable communicating. Unlike a land line phone which offers interaction between to fixed points in infinite, a nomadic phone offers an tantamount interaction at two random points. Furthermore, the cellular engineerings allow for non-stationary points, significance communicators are no longer tied to a fixed location. Enabling this nomadic communicating is an substructure web kindred to Levi-Strauss ‘ infrastructure of society. This is the unseeable, underlying system which ties everything together. With nomadic phones, a cellular web must be developed and maintained. This web must let easy connexion and must be linked to other cellular webs to enable transferring of one communicator to different locations with disrupting the manner of communicating. Finally, for this method to be genuinely effectual the web must be built around the communicators and their venues ; a cellular web in an empty desert serves no intent. Developing an effectual web therefore requires consciousness of bing locations of communicators and a method of mapping that information into a cellular web. Thus a construction develops based on the demands of a community. Of class, the communicators are by and large incognizant of this web. A adult male simply dials a figure on his Mobile phone, irrespective of where he is, and his married woman replies at some other unknown and apparently unrelated location. There is no demand for the users of this system to be cognizant of its nature, however the system does be. It is really easy to look around and see merely pandemonium. We are non required to see constructions in our day-to-day life. We take the construction itself for granted, yet that does non intend it does non be. We may gestate of cases where persons move outside the construction, or in a non-structured signifier. Yet when we seek communicate these actions we do so in a structured mode. The analysis, the manner we present the information, even the really linguistic communication itself contains an in agreement upon construction which allows us to pass on. But the construction is non massive and unchanging. A changeless duologue between different influences forms and reshapes the construction. We influence others even while we are influenced. At times a certain type of construction, such as the European theoretical account may look to rule but in clip even it is seen to be influenced by others. In the terminal thought of construction is in an built-in thought throughout the universe, a nd it is merely the peculiar signifier, what Levi-Strauss called the superstructure, that is distinguishable.BibliographyAbu-Lughod, J. ( 1989 ) . â€Å" Analyzing a System in Formation. † InBefore European Hegemony: The World System A.D. 1250-1350. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Pp 3-40. Althusser, L. ( 1970 ) .Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses.Retrieved on 28 Feb 10, From The Louis Althusser Internet Archive: hypertext transfer protocol: //www.marxists.org/reference/archive/althusser/1970/ideology.htm. DiTornaso, N. ( 1982 ) . â€Å" ‘Sociological Reductionism ‘ from Parsons to Althusser: Associating Action and Structure in Social Theory. †American Sociological Review, 47 ( 1 ) : 14-28. Geertz, C. ( 1973 ) . â€Å" Deep Play: Notes on a Balinese Cockfight. † InThe Interpretation of Cultures. London, UK: Hutchinson, Pp 412-454. Geertz, C. ( 1973 ) . â€Å" Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture. † InThe Interpretation of Cultures. London, UK: Hutchinson, Pp 3-30. Goffman, E. ( 1963 ) . â€Å" Stigma and Social Identity. † InStigma: Notes on the Management of a Spoiled Identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Pp. 1-40. Levi-Strauss, C. ( 1958 ) . â€Å" Structural Analysis in Linguistics and in Anthropology. † Retrieved on 13 Feb 10, From The Marxist Internet Archivess: hypertext transfer protocol: //www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/levistra.htm. Mintz, S. ( 1977 ) . â€Å" The Alleged World System: Local Initiative and Local Response. †Dialectical Anthropology, 2 ( 4 ) : 253-270. Nugent, D. ( 2009 ) . â€Å" Knowledge and Empire: The Social Sciences and United States Imperial Expansion. †Identities:Global Studies in Culture and Power, 17 ( 1 ) : 2-44. Trouillot, M-R. ( 1991 ) . â€Å" Anthropology and the Savage Slot: The Poeticss and Politicss of Otherness. † InRecapturing Anthropology: Working in the Present. Richard Fox ( erectile dysfunction ) . Pp. 17-44. Turner, V. ( 1975 ) . â€Å" Metaphors of Anti-Structure in Religious Culture. † InDramas, Fields and Metaphors: Symbolic Action in Human Society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Pp. 272-300.

Portrait of an Artist MichelAngelo Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Portrait of an Artist MichelAngelo - Essay Example Yet, the spiritual beauty of his art defied his personality as it elevated man to a position closer to his God. Commissioned by Popes and the richest patrons of the time, for 89 years Michelangelo defied his contradictory nature as he channeled his pessimistic sadness and transformed his art into a symbol of hope and eternal optimism. The works of Michelangelo have been seen by millions of people as a work of transcendental spiritual beauty, but for Michelangelo it was simply the product of his dedication and hard work. Michelangelo had carefully laid the groundwork for his art as a studious young man and a serious artist. He studied painting as a craft, philosophy, and anatomy, which would give him a deeper understanding of the form of man and his role in the creation of the universe. However, at the age of 17 he was faced with being in the commission of Piero dei Medici, a powerful leader that the people of Florence despised. Within two years Michelangelo's dark and individualistic nature caused him to reject the Medici commission and flee to Bologna, which drove the artist further into depression. According to Ruvoldt, "Since antiquity, melancholy's link to exceptional achievement had been seen as small consolation for its considerable drawbacks, including crippling depression" (88-89). These early hardships a nd setbacks would drive Michelangelo away from social contact and propel him closer to the spiritual nature of Christianity. Michelangelo would distance himself from the craft and technicalities that his training had given him in favor of searching for the spiritual component of art. He did not wish to be seen as a craftsperson or merely a technician. These were the qualities of man and art was the providence of God. This tension would further drive Michelangelo into the isolation of depression and sadness. A statue carved when Michelangelo was 19 years old, the Bologna Angel, illustrates his frustration with the limitations of man. According to Luchs, "The hands holding the candelabrum curve smoothly around it, waxy and boneless, in a thorough renunciation of the anatomical knowledge Michelangelo had recently and arduously acquired from his dissections at Santo Spirito" (222). At this young age Michelangelo was already tormented by his search for spirituality in a world that was caged with the mortality of man. One of Michelangelo's greatest works, the Sistine Chapel, embodies the tension between sadness and elation as well as the contrast between isolation and universal unity. Michelangelo did not employ a large staff of apprentices as was often the custom of his time, and chose to complete the task by himself. Michelangelo completed the design, the drawing, and the painting in isolation at the top of the chapel. Yet, the work that Michelangelo did on the Sistine chapel is today viewed by 3 million people that make a pilgrimage to Rome to gain a greater understanding of man as a product of their God (Romaine 23). Yet, this great work of art required the torment of loneliness and the deafening silence that his isolation provided. A committee could not have created it. Michelangelo's melancholy and optimism would be played out through his pen and brush, as the work is a study in the contrast between the mortal failings of man and the perfection of spirituality. The centerpiece of the Sistine Chapel is the

IMC (INTEGRATED MARKETING COMMUNICATION) Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

IMC (INTEGRATED MARKETING COMMUNICATION) - Essay Example Their commitment towards brand building with the dedication of its staff and employees and more so the devotion in terms of time and hard work is something that needs to be understood in the proper perspectives before we delve any further into this equation. The mission of JWT is to recognize the talents of the people who are the very best and nothing less is ever tolerated or compromised upon. It is because of this ideology that JWT has been able to create brands which have broken the clutter; no matter the campaign was of US origin or one that a short term tactical tilt to it, even in Australia. The belief and dependence on time is something that holds a lot of importance for the agency staff and it is apparent from their working regimes as well. The major competitors of JWT in terms of agency work and media buying include McCann Erickson, Saatchi & Saatchi, Foote, Cone and Belding (FCB), Leo Burnett and so on and so forth. [JWT] The current clients of JWT Worldwide include Unilever, Vodafone, HSBC, Ford, Kraft Foods, Shell, Rolex, Reckitt Benckiser, Pfizer, Nestle, Kellogg’s, Domino’s Pizza, Diageo and a host of others. Unilever is handled by JWT in more than seventy nations across the globe and thus it goes to show that the products of Unilever are marketed, advertised and promoted courtesy JWT. [Unilever] Unilever is one of the biggest revenue generating units in the world and more so, within the US and European markets. The efforts and endeavors of Unilever have made their due mark even in the developing markets like India, Pakistan and United Arab Emirates to name a few, where there has been seen tremendous growth. Domino’s Pizza chains are handled by JWT across the United States. It was about a decade back, in the year 1996 that the agency took over the advertising and promotion handling of the pizza chain which at the present times is one of the most developing and promising acros s the foods category