Law of Non Contradiction Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Law of Non Contradiction - Essay Example One can also say that a premise cannot be true and at the same time not true, in the same sense (Anton, 2009). All these three statements express the law of non contradiction. In the problems and challenges that one comes across in one’s day to day life, if approached rationally, yet without adhering to the law of non contradiction, could give way to much confusion (Morrison, 2003). I arrived at this sound conclusion while dealing with my personal aim and ambition to pursue a healthy lifestyle. What one calls a healthy life style is in fact a broad based term that includes within its ambit a range of healthy practices and a long list of does and don’t does. It is only when a person sticks to or diligently pursues a list of practices and norms identified as being precursors and essentials of a healthy lifestyle that one could claim to be leading a positive and healthy life. It also stands to be true that an unhealthy lifestyle also includes within its ambit a list of pra ctices and norms that are not conducive to good health. Going by the fact that a healthy lifestyle is a set of distinct practices and values, as per the law of non contradiction, a lifestyle cannot be both healthy and unhealthy at one and the same time. ... For example when I decided to be committed to leading a healthy lifestyle, I was well aware of the fact that a healthy lifestyle involves eating those things that promote health and well being and avoiding those foods that harm or spoil good health. It naturally follows that when I stick to good and healthy foods that I could consider myself to be leading a healthy lifestyle. However, there did come moments in my life when I tried to cheat by consuming things like fast foods, shakes and sodas, believing that it was alright to have such foods and beverages once in a while, while leading a healthy lifestyle. In other words, I was trying to convince myself that while consuming unhealthy foods at some time in my life and hence leading an unhealthy lifestyle, I was also leading a healthy lifestyle. Now by the law of non contradiction, this was simply not possible. It states that at one time, either I could be pursuing a healthy lifestyle or an unhealthy lifestyle. It was simply not possib le to lead a healthy and an unhealthy life at one and the same time. The premise that logically followed was that while pursuing unhealthy habits and consuming unhealthy foods, I was conclusively following an unhealthy lifestyle at that moment of time, which positively violated my personal commitment to lead a healthy lifestyle. In other words, it meant that while adhering to unhealthy habits at a moment of time, I was positively resorting to an unhealthy life and hence could readily expect the results that go with an unhealthy lifestyle, irrespective of my commitment to stay healthy and fit. This catechism indeed turned out to be an eye opener for me and made me really respect the validity of the law of non contradiction in daily life. There is

Technological Change and Economic Growth Research Paper

Technological Change and Economic Growth - Research Paper Example Moreover, it is very essential to understand here that technology does not refer only to the information and technology but it signifies the transfer of knowledge, both theoretical and practical knowledge (Amesse & Cohendet, 2001, pp. 1459-1478) that influences the process of development positively and/or negatively. In order to understand the role of technological change in economic growth and broadly, economic development, it is very imperative to understand the definition of the terms itself that will subsequently indicate the role. Particularly, it has been an observation that economic development (Borensztein & Lee, 1995, pp. 115-124) has often been taken only in terms of economic progress of a state; in other words, in terms of its gross domestic production. However, in current era, economic development is more than an increase in GDP and various factors play a role in determining positive or negative economic development of a country. ... Here, one can notice various indicators in this list cannot be analysed quantitatively and therefore, economic development is more than quantitative progress of a country. The World Bank (2013) data confirms strong relationship of technological change with economic growth of countries. Analysis of its findings has indicated that countries that have invested more in technological advancements, especially in the sectors of education and business have been successful in providing basic facilities to its population, which has resulted in their overall economic growth and/or development. In other words, when a government ensures secure and encouraging social environment by working towards increased technological advancements, it automatically results in higher economic growth of the country. This surely is an indication of the role of technological changes that facilitates economic growth of a country. While the paper includes discussion on the role of technological change in economic gro wth of a country, it will be inappropriate to overlook the particular role of multinational enterprises that they play by bringing FDIs especially in developing countries. For many decades, quantitative indicator of economic growth (Victor, 2008, pp. 5-11) has remained an essential requisite for developing countries to transform into modern and developed economies. In the year 1972, Gould (pg. 1) defined economic growth as â€Å"the sustained increase in real per capita incomes.† Here, one can see that economic growth does not consider short-term alterations since it focuses on ‘sustained increase’. In this regard, one cannot overlook the significant role of

Ideology of the films Essay Example for Free

Ideology of the films Essay I. Introduction Feature films such as Star Wars and The Terminator last just a couple of hours, but they take months or even years to make. Huge teams of people are involved in preparing for the action, and then capturing it on camera. Then, when the acting has finished, more hard work begins on turning the action into a film fit for cinema and TV screens. This paper studies (1) who were the first film-makers; (2) know the development of cinema worldwide; (3) be aware of the different types of modern film and; (4) figure out the film-making at present. II. Background A. The first film-makers The first people to invent equipment for making films were the Americans W. K. L. Dickson and Thomas Edison, in the early 1890s. Their apparatus consisted of a camera called the Kinetograph and a viewing box called the Kinetoscope. Only one person at a time could look into the viewing box to watch the film, which was in black and white, had no sound and lasted just a few seconds. Two French brothers called Auguste and Louis Lumiere first devised a way of projecting film images onto a large screen for an audience. The Lumiere brothers called their apparatus the Cinematographe. They carried out their first demonstration in a Paris cafe in December 1895. People were stunned to see the large, moving pictures. Other inventors immediately began creating new types of projectors and experimenting with making their own films. ? Early film-making ideas Film cameras do not record movement. The moving pictures we see on screen are actually still photographs, taken so quickly one after the other that they seem to merge. Each still photograph is called a frame. Most film cameras today take 24 frames every second, on a big reel of film that is wound steadily through the camera. The first film cameras, though, could take only 16 frames every second. The length of the film on the reel was 20 or 25 metres, which gave just about one minute of screen time. So the first films usually showed just one, short scene. For example, L’Arroseur Arrose (A Trick on the Gardener) by the Lumiere brothers, made in 1895. The first film with more than one scene was probably Come Along Do! , produced by the Robert Paul company in Britain in 1898. The company joined a scene outside an art gallery with a scene inside. A film-maker called George Melies began to produce multi-scene films, such as Cinderella (1899). Melies also experimented with interesting ways to join the scenes together. He often used equipment, such as slides and magic lanterns, to create special effects. At the turn of the century, two British film-makers working separately in Brighton came up with creative ideas for shooting the scenes themselves. George Albert Smith invented a technique for filming a scene from different camera positions. In The Little Doctors (1901), a scene showing somebody feeding medicine to a kitten is shown first from a distance, then in close-up, then from a distance again. James Williamson had a different idea—to shoot a piece of action across several scenes, instead of just one. In Stop Thief! (1901), the lead character runs out of one scene, then the film cuts to a new scene elsewhere and the lead character runs into the scene, continuing the story. An American film-maker called Edwin S. Porter used ideas like these especially effectively in a 1903 film called The Great Train Robbery. III. Discussion A. The Development of Cinema Worldwide In the early days of film-making there were no cinemas. Film-makers used specialist sales organizations to sell their films to entertainment organizers, who projected them as part of variety shows in tent theatres. From 1905 to 1908 in the United States, thousands of theatres (known as nickelodeons) were set up especially for film. Permanent film theatres were also established across Europe, and film-making became a booming business. From 1908 a leading centre for American film-making developed in an area of southern California called Hollywood. Established British and French film companies were joined by flourishing film industries all over the world. An Italian film company produced the first large-scale film in 1912. It was called Quo Vadis? , and used massive film sets and more than 5,000 actors. Film-going became so popular that from 1914 many lavish cinemas called picture palaces were created. They could seat thousands of people at a time. Film-companies began to make films that lasted for several reels instead of just one. Picture palace audiences had to wait in the middle of a film while the projectionist changed reels. Films in those days were silent, so picture palaces usually had a pianist or organist who played music to accompany the action. Film-makers also included short written sentences in the film to add to the story or explain what the actors were saying. One of the most famous silent film stars was the British actor Charlie Chaplin (1889-1977), who created the loveable character of the â€Å"little tramp† who had a funny walk. Many film companies experimented with animated drawings and models, as well as human actors. European film companies introduced the idea of making information films about events in the news, as well as films for entertainment. ? Color and Sound From the early 1900s, inventors had worked on films with colour and sound. The first breakthrough with colour came in 1908 in London, when G. A. Smith demonstrated a colour film process called Kinemacolour. However, Kinemacolour shades were based on just two colours, so films continued to be made in black and white. The first colour films to be created successfully from two colours were Toll of the Sea and The Black Pirate, shown to the public in 1922. In 1926 the American film company Warner Brothers delighted audiences with a series of short films that had sound to match the pictures. As the sound was recorded on a separate disc, the words did not always match the mouth movements of the actors. Warner Brothers’ The Jazz Singer was the first full-length talkie, in 1927. The film company Fox soon developed a more effective technique for recording the sound onto the film itself. During the 1930s, Hollywood film companies made the most of the new sound technology by making musicals with singing and dancing stars such as Shirley Temple, and Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers. Gangster talkies and romantic comedies were popular in the United States and Britain, although at this time the Japanese film industry was the largest producer of films in the world. In 1934, the Bombay Talkies studio was formed in India, founding one of the biggest film industries in the world. While film companies had been busy creating talkies, they had also been working on perfecting colour in films. Finally a process was developed that used three colors to create different shades, rather than just two. In 1935, the first three-strip Technicolor film was produced, Becky Sharp. From then on, moving pictures not only sounded real, they looked real too. B. Different Types of Modern Films Since the early days, many different types, or genres, of feature film have been made. These include westerns (such as The Magnificent Seven), thrillers (The Fugitive), comedies (Home Alone), action adventures (Indiana Jones), supernatural horror (Dracula), war epics (The Great Escape), romantic comedies (When Harry Met Sally). Crime and gangster films (The Godfather), films with animation (Who Framed Roger Rabbit? ), spy adventures (Mission Impossible), kung-fu extravaganzas (Enter the Dragon), science-fiction (E.T. —The Extraterrestrial) and modern musicals (Grease and Moulin Rouge). Sometimes films combine two or more genres. Some films are produced with three-dimensional technology, so that if you wear special glasses, the images on-screen appear to have more depth, just like in real life. Other films are made for IMAX cinemas. These special cinemas have giant-sized screens with sophisticated sound systems to make you feel as if you are right in the middle of the action. IV. Conclusion A. Film-making today Film-making requires different specialist staff and technical processes, depending on what the film is about. All films go through three broad stages before they are ready for an audience. During the pre-production stage all the preparations are made for filming. The producer chooses the story, raises money and employs the people who will work on the film. The scriptwriter writes the words, creating an exciting plot and interesting characters. The director decides on the overall style of the film and chooses the leading actors. The art director is in charge of designers for the film sets, costumes and makeup, and choosing locations outside the studio. Technical directors are in charge of crews who build huge film sets and arrange lighting, sound and special effects. The production manager controls the budget and makes practical arrangements for filming. During the production stage filming takes place. Stories are not usually filmed in the right order. The actors and crew film all the scenes that take place in one location before moving on to another. The director guides the creative elements of the film, from giving opinions on the story, to instructing the actors, to choosing camera angles. The director is helped by people in different departments. For instance, a continuity person makes sure that all the details are correct in scenes that are shot out of sequence (such as the actors’ clothes and length of their hair). That way, when the filmed scenes are put into the right order later, they will run together smoothly. The post-production stage happens when all the action has been filmed. An editor cuts sequences of action and joins them together, adding the sound. When the director and producer are happy with it, the finished film is then ready for distribution companies to sell to cinemas or TV companies.

Environmental Crime and Green Criminology

Environmental Crime and Green Criminology The fast social, technological, political and environmental development of the world we live in is almost beyond comprehension. All these changes have created growing demands for goods and services that cannot be supplied anymore by the ordinary economy and business services, but the criminal economy must jump in. Furthermore, new mobility has increased trade, tourism, expansion of the scientific and cultural cooperation and much more. Borders are turning pale and becoming insignificant. Everything has gone to the undreamed-of rate. But unfortunately at the same time all this progress has caused war, pice, and crime of unprecedented proportion (Moore and Fields, 2005). Environmental crime represents one of such (inter)national problem that is growing very fast and wide and as stressed by Fields, Arrigo and Webb (2005), these crime problems are highly complex in relation to those with whom criminologists were used to deal with, as it will be shown below. Comparative criminology refers to the systematic and theoretically-informed comparison of criminality (crime and crime trends) in two or more countries (Howard, Newman and Pridemore, 2010). Comparative studies are very important for criminology, because they offer great potential for increasing the explanatory power of criminological theories.  [1]  Furthermore, comparative criminal justice studies reduce the enormous differences between crime rates among different countries.  [2]  Although many authors (Shelley, 1981; Rokaw, Mercy and Smith, 1990; Hans-Gunther, Shelley and Kaoth, 1992) in the field of comparative criminal justice surveys assume that the goal of comparative criminology is si mply to test whether claims about crime causation stand up in the rich texture of cultural variation, Beirne and Nelken (1997) stress that the scope of comparative criminology is wider than the search for the causes of crime. It includes the study of transnational crime, the problems of exporting models of crime control to other countries and the way the views of criminologists are themselves influenced by their cultures in the search of explanations of crime. Furthermore, Bennett and Lynch (1990: 153) state that cross-national studies of crime (criminal justice) issues play an important role in building theory and guiding public policy. The last one more and more often relies on the scientific survey results and findings, with the intention of bringing the right decision about the public related crime problems. Neuman and Berger (1998: 300-301) argue that comparative criminology is plagued by a hiatus between theory and research. Therefore, the different levels of theoretical explanations need to be explored with data that simultaneously employ variables at the contextual and individual levels. Quantitative studies must be complemented by in-depth historical research in order to examine the specific processes occurring within nations. Quantitative cross-national studies with aggregate data are appropriate to evaluate alternative perspectives but it is important to be explicit about the methatheoretical assumptions underlying such research. Beirne and Messeschmidt (1995) warn that if mentioned conditions are not fulfilled, studies will proliferate with exercises of verification and falsification of numerous middle-range theories without a cumulative development of theoretical knowledge. As pointed out by MeÃ…Â ¡ko (2008: 31), the issues about the movement of crime and crime policies between countries and cultures and comparison between countries are important. According to this it is important who are the carriers of these changes and comparisons, and furthermore the transfer of knowledge, ideas and concepts itself and their understanding and implementation in a society. The purpose of comparative studies of crime and criminal justice is to know the impact of cultural, political, economic and other effects on the differences in attitudes towards crime, law enforcement response to violations of laws crime and criminality.  [3]  The comparative criminology enables all this. Different authors (Beirne and Hill, 1991, Fields and Moore, 1996; Wardak and Sheptycki, 2005, Reichel, 2008) define comparative criminology as the systematic study of crime, law and social supervision in two or more cultures, noting that this aspect of criminology has been neglected in the past. Comparative criminology with the support in the criminal justice system and studies allows a comparison of crime and related phenomena between two or more countries. By applying this method, criminologists try to identify the similarities and differences in crime patterns between different cultures. Ideally, it would be necessary to test the theory in as many different possible conditions. Howard and Newman (2001) stressed that in the last decade criminologists realized that the majority of the existing criminal legal theories are limited only to a few western countries. In the last period this situation is slowly changing, as the criminologists, faced with rising crime rates, felt a strong need to share and exchange the experiences and learn from each other. Reichel (2008: 30) points out that at doing the comparisons between countries one needs to focus on the changing crime rates and provide a unified definition, reporting and recording or keeping of crime statistics; other wise the results are not representative, valid and useful. Although many theoretical, methodological, and philosophical problems certainly have dogged comparative criminology since its inception, Howard, Newman and Pridemore (2010) stress that this field of investigation is currently in a state of rapid expansion. Beirne (1983) warns that any serious comparative analysis of crime must confront the reliability of information about crime rates and victimization. Like all cross-cultural analyses, comparative criminology is beset with difficulties about what to compare, how and for what purpose. Promise and the perils of comparative criminology are everything but negligible, because this form of criminological research faces additional obstacles of problems, which all social explanations face. Because the definition of crime is conventional and because it depends on differences between systems of criminal justice, the technical and conceptual obstacles to comparing crime rates and explaining the causes of criminal behavior comparatively are definitely serious. And over and over again, new questions spring up, such as: Is the meaning of criminal behavior constant across different legal systems and cultures? How far can we risk explanations of environmental crime, which avoid reference to meaning? H ow much reliability should we attach to crime data from different societies that are gathered by the police or by victimization surveys? etc. In 1987 Michalowski and Kramer conducted a comparative criminal justice (criminological) study in the field of environmental crime. Back in 1980s they noticed the significant expansion of transnational corporations in the Third World. Because in many developing nations legal control over corporate violations against the environment did not grow commensurately these corporations engaged legally in a variety of injurious actions that would have been recognized as violations of criminal regulatory, or civil law in their home countries. According to Michalowski and Kramer (1987) the differences in the laws of home/countries of origin and host countries, and the ability of transnational corporations to influence the legal climate in the host countries renders the laws derived at the level of nation-states an unsatisfactory basis for determining the scope of criminological research on transnational corporate (environmental) crime.  [4]  Similar cases of expansions are known also in Eur ope, in Eastern Europe (Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine etc.) and in the Balkan Region (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Albania, Kosovo etc.). Some West European and other foreign corporations moved most of their production to these developing countries with the reason of reasonable production costs, although the second (hidden) reason for such decision was and still is less restricted environmental protection legislation.  [5]   Bennett and Lynch (1990: 176) made an analysis of cross-national crime indicators and ascertained that the particular use, to which data are put, will affect the comparability and reliability of the descriptive statistics generated. In this respect they add that for surveys focused on aggregated description or the explanation of variance in crime across nations (except homicide) and/or across time, the choice of data set need to be determined by the relative reliability of the data (e.g. diversity of included nations; the accessibility of the data; timelines and completeness of the information). Furthermore, Beirne and Lynch (1990) warn that Interpol data sets are deficient and unreliable and therefore not appropriate for comparative cross-national surveys. When talking about the international data sets it needs to be added that one has to be careful when using data from different international organizations data sets, such as United Nations, World Health Organization, Interpol, Euro pol etc., because they can distinguish very much. On the other side, as stated by Benne and Lynch (1990: 178), dedicated data collection systems, such as victimization surveys, offer greater potential for providing the data needed for descriptive cross-sectional research purposes. The best example of comparative cross-national survey is the International Crime Survey (ICS), where methodology in all participating countries is equal, which means that results of conducted comparisons are reliable and useful. Howard, Newman and Pridemore (2010) attribute several goals of comparative research in criminology, from which some are obvious applications of the traditional canons of the scientific method, and some are unique to the study of crime in an international setting. According to authors, these goals of comparative criminological research are: extending theories beyond cultural and national boundaries; assessing the performance of national criminal justice systems; evaluating national criminal justice policy; coordinating the fight against transnational crime and reasonable critique. Mainly comparative criminology attends to understanding criminal and deviant behavior. If the crime survey is manifested globally, comparative criminological studies will provide useful insights into the control of antisocial activity.  [6]  Furthermore, it is inevitable that the criminological study intersects with the field of criminal justice. For Howard, Newman and Pridemore (2010), comparative criminological surveys are important because of five essential reasons, because they represent and allow: theoretical development and testing; advance comparative analysis; data explosion; policy development; and globalization and comparative studies of crime and criminal justice. When conducting comparative criminological research, academicians can use different methodology and research tools. It actually depends on the nature of research. Howard, Newman and Pridemore (2010) divide the methodology used in comparative criminological surveys into two groups. The first group includes surveys of comparative research that examine specific substantive issues of crime (e.g. violent crime, property crime, national crimes with international implications such as genocide, domestic violence, transnational crime), where crime represents a dependent variable. The second group includes the general types of studies (e.g. metalevel studies (victi mization surveys), parallel studies (crime rate/criminal justice system analysis; topical comparison; replication of an experimental design), and case studies) normally undertaken by comparative criminologists. MeÃ…Â ¡ko (2008b: 31) emphasizes that comparisons between countries in the form of comparative criminological surveys are important, especially in the field of environmental criminality. Next to the comparison of crime data sets, the transfer of knowledge, ideas and concepts itself and their understanding and implementation in a society can be crucial. For this reason, the main aim of comparative criminological surveys of crimes against the environment is to know the impact of cultural, political, economic and other impacts on the differences in attitudes towards environmental crime, law enforcement response to environmental violations and the overcoming of obstacles posed by the lack of relevant knowledge in countries, where green criminology is developing. Comparative criminology enables all this and for this reason it should be more often used in comparisons of environmental crime forms, green criminology findings and environmental justice responses between two or more countri es. At the beginning of their discussion about the meaning and importance of the comparative criminological study Howard, Newman and Pridemore (2010) assert that with the growth of international transparency and the capacity of the World Wide Web to disseminate information, data about crime and justice around the world are more accessible than ever. The data about environmental crime are no exception (more and more information about environmental harm and environmental damage and degradation is published on the world web by non-governmental organizations and accessible to everyone). Environmental crime in comparison to criminological and criminal justice surveys Environmental crime is every temporary or permanent legally defined deviant act or resigned activity, which causes an artificial change, worsening, burdening, degeneration or destruction of (human) environment or breaking its natural changes. The perpetrator could be anyone or every one of us (corporations, companies, groups, individuals, etc). White (2009: 1) stresses that for many people and experts the term environmental crime is best described not in terms of legality but in terms of new concepts of environmental justice. For him, environmental harm can be conceptualized in the aspect of three broad approaches to the understanding of environmental issues: conventional criminology  [7]  , ecological perspectives  [8]  and green criminology.  [9]  For White (2008), environmental crime is harm against the environment that is being perpetrated across the earth, although its intensity and form varies depending upon specific regions and specific populations. His definition of environmental crime seems more or less logical, although is hard to RAZDELITI and use in comparative criminological or/and criminal justice survey. The definition of environmental crime should be simple, clear and understandable. Only that way the definition could be broadly acceptable (unified) and possible to use for the purpose of comparative studies. In this respect, Clifford and Edwards (1998) warn that an extremely broad definition is not useful for purposes of analysis, because everything can be included in it. Clifford and Edwards suggest that one of the objectives of defining environmental crime is to make reasonable comparisons possible and for this reason the definition has to be so broad as to preclude meaningful distinctions. And something else is definitely true, more researchers and experts know about the environmental crime, the more surveys they conduct, the better their suggested concept (definition) of environmental crime will be. After analyzing the sociological (criminological), philosophical and legal concept of environmental crime, Clifford and Edwards (1998: 25) offered their definition of environmental crime: An environmental crime is an act in violation of an environmental protection statue that applies to the area in which the act occurred and that has already indentified criminal sanctions for purposes of police enforcement. To make their definition easier to understand, Clifford and Edwards (1998: 26) divided it into two parts. The first part defines the term environmental crime from the philosophical aspect: Environmental crime is an act committed with the intent to harm or with a potential to cause harm to ecological and/or biological systems and for the purpose of securing business or personal advantage. The second definition, arising from the legal aspect, states that an environmental crime is any act that violates an environmental protection statute. With the use of such definitions of environme ntal crime the execution of comparative criminological and criminal justice studies is possible and achievable. When talking about environmental crime, we talk about very different phenomena, which are very hard to be gathered in a single universal definition. Environmental crime as such is more or less new and still an unknown form of crime and in some aspects a different form of crime as criminologists, researchers and other experts are used to (classic crime).  [10]  When dealing with environmental crime and performing (comparative) criminological or criminal justice studies man has to be aware of the following most often and important particularities of the environmental criminality: Environmental crime is very diverse all around the world, between countries and between regions (it is inherent to each individual, the economic system, environmental and biological systems, etc.). The problem of the agreed definition of the term environmental crime is still causing problems. One of them is a unified comprehension of the term environmental crime in comparative studies. Because of the lack of adjusted terminology and of a united internationally acknowledged definition, problems on all other levels of discussion, punishment and prevention of environmental crime are appearing.  [11]   Environmental crime is related to the technical development and progress; therefore new forms of environmental criminality are continually produced. Never ending changes to already present forms of environmental crime show themselves in extension and represent the need for constant monitoring, supplementing and changing of the already existing divisions or forming new ones.  [12]   Environmental crime is specific on one hand because of the perpetrators (offenders), their motives and the chosen modus operandi, and on the other hand because of special features of two different victims. Environmental crime acts usually do not affect human victims directly, as it happens in classical forms of criminality. In this case the first victim of a criminal act of environmental crime is the environment, which afterwards threatens the humans (poisoned water sources, toxic gas release, polluted soil, etc.). The narrow research of the whole field of environmental criminality and lack of different ways of research of environmental crime clearly show the need to extend the methodological approaches in criminological studies of environmental crime. Besides supplementing and verification of different comprehensions, the need for alternative approaches to research modern forms of environmental threats also expresses itself, because with human development and modern progress the forms and offenders of environmental crimes are changing. Green criminology has to recognize the lack of specific knowledge (especially natural sciences knowledge), which are essential for effective dealing with deviations against the environment. In this respect, the relations between various disciplines that need to be defined and framed are important. Furthermore, the field of environmental criminality demands a multidisciplinary approach. In the field of ecology, better to say environmental justice, the boundaries between licit and illicit (legal and illegal) are often vague (circumvention of the environmental threats to the legal order of the country). Sometimes the (inter)national environmental law is an imperfect system for the protection of the environment, because it is sometimes too broad and vague, or it depends on national interests elsewhere. Inseparable connection of environmental crime with the society and the way of life make the effort of the active criminological researching of environmental crime and finding more effective supervision systems and methods for preventing environmental crime even harder. In the front is the problem of defining the relation man environment (offender powerless victim).  [13]   More and more attention is drawn into the relation environment safety. Such condition also reflects itself in numerous countries, which try hard to cooperate more intensively in the field of environmental protection on the international level. The need for adequate measures and a more structural and planned approach to such problems and responses to it is growing. All of the above listed characteristics of environmental criminality are very important. They define environmental crime as such and must be taken into account when carrying out green criminological research or analysis. Furthermore, the characteristics must not be ignored when performing comparative criminological surveys; otherwise the results may be incorrect and misleading. One of such example is the use of ICS results in environmental crime comparative criminological survey, because the victims of environmental crime, caused harm and consequences, are still mostly unknown, therefore the conclusions based on a small number of victims reports could be misleading. Furthermore, different forms of environmental crime (e.g. crimes against air, water, soil, etc.) cause different damage and consequences, have different victims and even can be hidden for decades. For better understanding of what exactly environmental crime is, what is punishable, how violence is punished, why it comes to violence and who are the victims of environmental crime, we first need to define the basic terms. The answers to the following questions who committed crime, why he committed it and how the crime is committed against the environment, are expected to be explained by criminology with a good reason. Green criminology has developed as a branch of a science about criminal acts and their perpetrators, which researches the forms of deviant behavior and investigates the causes of such behavior, describes such phenomena and observes them in their development. After all, criminology is not legal, but empirical science, which uses comprehensions of empirical researches and results of the experience. As such, green criminology, can and is using comparative studies to understand and be able to explain environmental crime more detailed and accurately. The comparative criminological and criminal justice studies of environmental crime are very rare due the several reasons. The most important is the unknown, inadequately defined and poorly researched field of environmental criminality all over the globe. Despite that, the importance and the benefits of comparative criminological studies are very important for the further development of the environmental crime field and green criminology as mainstream social science dealing with environmental issues. The scope of comparative green criminology and criminal justice is wider than the search for the causes of environmental crime, as already mentioned by Beirne and Nelken (1997). For this reason it includes the study of transnational environmental crime, the problems of exporting models of environmental crime control to other countries and the way the views of green criminologists are themselves influenced by their cultures in the search of explanations of environmental crime. When conducting a comparative study of environmental crime one has to be aware that the purpose of comparative studies of crime is to know the impact of cultural, political, economic and other impacts on the differences in attitudes towards environmental crime, law enforcement response to violations of environmental protection laws environmental crime and environmental criminality. The use of comparative criminological and criminal justice studies in the field of environmental crime is very important, because i t enables a comparison of environmental crime and related phenomena, such as environmental degradation and destruction, between two, three or more countries. Furthermore, green criminologists try to identify the similarities and differences in the environmental crime patterns between different cultures with the application of this method. Furthermore, they use them to understand and explain the causes for committing environmental crimes. Comparative criminological and criminal justice surveys of environmental crime are important because of five essential reasons, stressed by Howard, Newman and Pridemore (2010: STRAN). They represent and allow: a) theoretical development and testing of criminological theories in the field of environmental criminality and green criminology; b) advance comparative environmental crime analysis; c) environmental crime data explosion; d) (environmental) crime policy development; and e) globalization and comparative studies of environmental crime and criminal justice. What is more, the purpose of such studies is to know the impact of cultural, political, economic and other impacts on the differences in attitudes towards crime, law enforcement response to violations of laws crime and criminality. The comparative criminology enables all this and for this reason it should be more often used in comparisons of environmental crime forms, green criminology findings and environmental justice respo nses between two or more countries. Similar to Slovenia, some countries have typical characteristics in existent phenomenal forms of environmental crime, as well as by offenders of the environmental crime. For this reason the comparison should be set on a common basis, which is widely accepted all over the world. Comparative criminology could be for example used in a survey that would originate from Sutherlands (1939; in Sutherland and Cressey, 1974) definition of criminology.  [14]  By combining different research methods, it is possible to explain the problem of extension and destructive power of environmental crime on one hand and on the other unconsciousness of noxiousness and its influence on the environment, human and his life. The environmental topic and the research approach are relevant for Slovenian science and also for work of green criminology and competent authorities, because they represent an exact analysis of discourse of environmental crime in the country and worldwide. The practicability of this a pproach shows itself in offering the results and comprehensions that could be the basis of activities to protect the society from environmental crime. Comparative criminological studies are very important for further development of green criminology and the gathering of additional knowledge about the environmental crime. The desired objectives of such a survey are often an understanding of criminal and deviant behavior against the environment in the chosen country and assessing the performance of the national criminal justice system. The transfer of knowledge about environmental criminality remains the main aim of the comparative criminological survey. Furthermore, comparative green criminological and criminal justice studies enable a comparison of environmental crime and related phenomena between compared countries, and help green criminologists identify similarities and differences in environmental crime patterns, and understand and explain the causes for and consequences of environmental crimes.

Big Brook :: Personal Narrative Fishing Essays

Big Brook â€Å"When you leave this place, you will always remember the nights fishin’ up on Big Brook,† my father once told me. And to this day I have never forgotten my experiences up on that little tributary of the Namakagon River in northern Wisconsin. My father always dreams of the old days when he would go out with a creel over his shoulder and catch a meal of fish. Work takes too much of his time now, but I remember the times we would go up to Big Brook after work and spend the last hours before the sun set fishing our favorite holes in hopes for a big trout to bite. I remember this now, many years later, but my memories are still perfectly clear. We would get home from work, dad would say, â€Å"Alright, I am goin’ up to Big Brook, if ya wanna come with, I am leavin’ in five.† This was our cue, my brothers and I would drop everything we were doing, grab our rods, and head out to the garden to pick a handful of worms. The garden was always the best spot for the worms; they seemed to love the dark rich soil and always grew the biggest. Even though we dug them every week, there would always seem to be more the next time we went out. When we arrived at the meandering stream, Dad would say, â€Å"Alright, I get the first 100 yards downstream, everything else is open season for you all to fight about.† My brothers would usually get the section just upstream, cause they were bigger, and I didn’t have much say in the matter. So there we were, all the guys in the family on the river, my father heading to his favorite spot, my brothers marching upstream together, and I left to make my way downstream, through the blackberry brush to the beaver pond. When I left the river to walk downstream all the difficulties from the day were left behind. I walked through a grove of aspen, and looking under a clump of brush I saw a cottontail rabbit, but he knew, if he didn’t move I wouldn’t see the little guy; so I passed quietly, in hopes not to scare him. As I walked I would be occasionally wafted with the smell of wild roses, or the smell of fresh air that would blow through the trees.

Use of Doubt To Persuade Essay -- Successful Persuasion Essays

Persuasion goes on around us everyday, all the time, on television, on advertisements, even in conversations with friends. Perhaps because of this, much has been written on how to persuade more effectively. Most of this literature is built upon the notion that to persuade is to urge successfully and completely. Going along these lines, certainty and confidence are logical complements to effective persuasion, since we cannot hope to convince others when we are ourselves in doubt. Doubt, therefore, is felt to be at the other end of the spectrum and antithetical to persuasion. But the art of persuasion is a human art, and so it is a living art, which cannot be satisfactorily summed up between the covers of self-improvement guides. In reality, successful persuasion can somewhat deviate from the conventional criteria of certainty; in fact, even doubt can be used to persuade. This exciting possibility appears unlikely from the start, because there is an inherent paradox in the notion that doubt can persuade. This contradiction is even clearer when we consider persuasion in the form of a speech given to a large audience. To be able to hold his own in front of a crowd, the speaker, surely, must be certain of himself and what he wants to say. But there is a possible approach by which orators can round the corner of persuading with doubt, and even make doubt work to their advantage. Given that the doubt is a shared concern of both the speaker and his audience, a candid confession of uncertainty may open new emotional inroads into the audience. By serving as a common denominator and a common challenge to both parties, a shared doubt when brought into the open can direct the combined energies of the listeners towards finding a workable so... ...nd genuine than an outward show of sorrow. In this case, to contrive is to constrict. Doubt as an instinct embedded in persuasion transcends common rhetoric as it moves beyond the rational sphere of intellect into the domain of unbridled emotions. For this reason, and also because it was with an intention to explore persuasion beyond conventional notions that we set out to study the use of doubt in the first place, it is impossible and indeed unnecessary to encapsulate the skill of persuading with doubt within any sort of generalising guidelines. To subject this practice to prescriptive limits is to sever its lifeline-the vital element of spontaneity that moves with circumstances. As Lee lamented, "sometimes, history takes many devious turns"; it was exactly through one such quirk of history that his speech in 1965 achieved such astonishing payoffs ("Press" 9).

Alexis De Tocqueville’s Thought On Freedom Of Press

The issues of the freedom of press and the freedom of speech have for long been discussed by scholars. Professionals in politics, sociology, communications, and public relations tried to distinguish, whether freedom of press was a positive notion. The book of Alexis de Tocqueville is interesting in terms of discussing the freedom of press through politics only. Besides, the author tended to assume that freedom of press could become a negative phenomenon in the life of society.These assumptions are surprising for us, who are used to freedom of press and freedom of speech, but Tocqueville's work should be analyzed in order to understand, in what state the freedom of press is currently found. Democracy in America: the freedom of press â€Å"I confess that I do not entertain that firm and complete attachment to the liberty of the press which things that are supremely good in their very nature are wont to excite in the mind; and I approve of it more from a recollection of the evils it pr events than from a consideration of the advantages it ensures.† (Tocqueville, 2006) Tocqueville did not conceal his attitudes towards the freedom of the press: he supposed that freedom of press could potentially produce political evils, but simultaneously, he also tried to be objective in evaluating the state of freedom of press in the two countries – the United States and France. Freedom of press should be considered in the light of the assumption, that press is the embodiment, and the means of expressing certain ideas.Press is the means of transferring the ideas to the masses, and the language is the instrument to convey these ideas to the public. It is relevant to state, and Tocqueville recognized this conflict, and no matter how negative or positive freedom of press could be, it did not impact the state of political affairs in the country. This may sound rather contradictory, but the author provides us with a very clear explanation of the subject: he refers to langu age as â€Å"the mere carcass of the thought†.Consequentially, the press becomes the mere form for expressing the ideas of certain political circles. In case the freedom of press is suppressed, the ideas themselves will not disappear and will continue their existence due to the fact that â€Å"the sense and the spirit of the work is too subtle for their [tribunals] authority† . Even in the case censorship is established the word of public in Tocqueville's understanding will be heard.In the attempt to objectively evaluate the state of press and its freedom in the world, Tocqueville refers to specific reasons of why some nations simply have to cherish freedom of press: among the major reasons the author discusses the liberty of press as the only source of justice in the countries, where judicial system lacks sound laws to prosecute those who violate laws, possessing legal impunity . In the case with the United States, the freedom of press is the direct consequence of the individual sovereignty, which American citizens exercise.In the political and legal environment, in which the U. S. citizens do exist, it would be not only inappropriate, but absolutely absurd to adopt the measures of informational censorship . â€Å"The sovereignty of the people and the liberty of the press may therefore be looked upon as correlative institutions; just as the censorship of the press and universal suffrage are two things which are irreconcilably opposed, and which cannot long be retained among the institutions of the same people.† (Tocqueville, 2006)Tocqueville determines the political situation in France and America in the similar revolutionary terms, acknowledging the fact that America did not possess a single germ of revolution, while the roots of the press and freedom of press development in France were mainly found in the social instability, through which that country had to go during that time. The freedom of press in both countries led to the situatio n, when it was already formed as a singular power, combining both goods and evils.The situation described in Tocqueville's work was really similar to that we face today: the freedom of press makes this press almost incompatible with that we call social and political order. Probably, Tocqueville was very predictive and could foresee that the freedom of press could potentially produce public disorder, but in any case he was very objective, recognizing the power of press in the United States. â€Å"In France the press combined a twofold centralization; almost all its power is centred in the same spot, and vested in the same hands, for its organs are far from numerous.â€Å"In those terms Tocqueville was trying to express the basic statements of what we currently call â€Å"ownership† in press . On the contrary, the American nation did not possess any centralized control over its press, which has become the direct consequence of the freedom of press in that country. According t o Tocqueville, America was initially keeping to the opinion, that the more journals it published, the more neutralized would be their effect on the public. However, the frequent situations we now witness are different from the way the author wanted to position them.The numerous publications are certainly the expression of the freedom of press, but they also tend to produce the clash of opinions, social attitudes and even disorders in the attempt to gain more economic profits. The press has turned to be the mere marketplace of ideas, which is the major discrepancy between the press now and the press then. According to Tocqueville, freedom of press is often the major cause of the situation, when neither of published sources is capable of convincing the public of this or that opinion.The countries which experience freedom of press also face the situation when â€Å"men are not very ready to die in defence of their opinions, but they are rarely inclined to change them; and there are fe wer martyrs as well as fewer apostates. † The freedom of press: Tocqueville’s theory vs. contemporary society â€Å"By press is usually meant all media of mass communication although the printed media, as the oldest, is treated as the exemplar in most discussions.† The press in democratic countries acts independently from the state power, and democratic governments do not have any centralized control over the contents of published texts or the journalists’ activity. The current situation in the freedom of the world press has somewhat changed with the development of globalized Internet resources, which do not make the press free, but rather make the press uncontrolled. One should agree that while these two dimensions determine one issue, they are completely different, and being free does not mean being uncontrolled.The situation which we observe in our society also possesses similar features described by Tocqueville: he referred to the role of the free pres s as the guarantee to those, whose legal system was too weak to protect its citizens. These principles are not changed and tend to acquire new stronger features. Volokh states that democratic governments are responsible for their actions ; this is why citizens expect that they will be informed about the decisions, which are taken by these governments on their behalf. Press fosters the realization of this right â€Å"to know†, and serves the means of tracking all governments’ actions.The free press appears to promote the government’s accountability, and is not as frequent source of social disorder, as Tocqueville assumed. However, Tocqueville was right in his assumptions as for the possible negativity of the freedom of press. This negativity is currently demonstrated through the facts of less control and less accountability of press in general. Surely, it is difficult to disagree that the press in the U. S. is free, but not everyone understands real implications of this freedom in the contemporary societal conditions.First of all, freedom of press is never absolute; our society is not an exception. We are frequently deceived, thinking that everyone has an opportunity to express his thoughts in press. However, â€Å"in societies like ours, freedom of press is far from just a facade. There are many possibilities to pressure the media, and there are openings within them. † Second, our press is not the only source of accumulating our ideas and thoughts; there are numerous expressions and discussions beyond press. A bright example illustrates our discussion. Haenngi spoke about the Multilateral Agreement on Investments.The conflict arouse from the negotiations held by OECD and the mentioned organization and was expressed in the article published by â€Å"Business Week†. The informational explosion has achieved so large scales that the negotiations were ceased, and the press proved its role as the largest carrier of the public bodie s’ accountability. This was a small, but a meaningful victory, though objectively, the press in that case was balancing at the edge between the social fairness and social disorder. The situation with the U. S. press is different from the rest of the states due to the American society keeping to high standards of social welfare.This means that the large portion of the U. S. citizens belongs to whom we call â€Å"rich people†. The whole American history proves that the rights to be free were not granted but were won by the citizens themselves. This is why it is possible to assume that â€Å"universal suffrage and universal schooling have at last made bourgeoisie stand in fear of the common people, for the masses promised to become king. † The masses could allow taking such leading positions only because the press could serve an effective instrument in not only expressing the will of masses, but defending their will.The situation is different in other countries: fo r example the state of mass media in India is mostly regulated by the narrow circles. The issue of ownership is very relevant for the Indian press . This is why the situation is very unbalanced, and as Tocqueville explained, different states need and use media with different purposes. Simultaneously, the effects of the freedom of press for every state are integrally linked to the level of the legal, social, political and economic development in this state.Freedom of press cannot exist separately from the mentioned development; otherwise it loses its power and risks being turned into the weapon of influential minorities. Doubtlessly, the press has acquired more opportunities for expression, but it still retains the older features described by Tocqueville. Even taking into account that the author of Democracy in America did not recognize the positive character of the freedom of press, he objectively acknowledged the need for it to exist. We have just entered the stage of social develo pment, when freedom of press is considered to be the sign of the democratic society.Yet, none of us ever looks inside to understand whether this freedom is genuine. Conclusion The book of Alexis de Tocqueville was very relevant for the time, during which it was being written. It has retained its relevance until today. The present-day society understands the importance of the freedom of press, but it is not rare that the press is being governed by outside factors or players, who wish to use it for the promotion of one’s interests. It is also difficult to distinguish, whether freedom of press is authentic and is not the cover of the political plays â€Å"behind the curtains†.The society has greatly changed since the time Democracy in America was written; the importance of the freedom of press has not changed, though. Its value was supplemented with the well-known processes of globalization and marketing, when the freedom of press is frequently confused with the press bei ng totally uncontrolled and used for the proliferation of certain ideas to obtain economic benefits.BIBLIOGRAPHYBernabe-Riefkohl, A. â€Å"Government Advertising Placement and the First Amendment: Freedom of the Press Should Overweigh the Rights of the Government as Contractor†. Communications and Law 22 (2000): 123-129.Haenggi, S. â€Å"The Right to Privacy Is Coming: Balancing Individual’s Right to Privacy from the Press and the Media’s Right to Freedom of Expression†. Houston Journal of International Law 21 (1999): 23-34.Tocqueville, A. â€Å"Liberty of the Press in the United States. † In Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Project Gutenberg, 2006. Volokh, E. â€Å"Freedom of Speech and Information Privacy: The Troubling Implications of a Right to Stop People from Speaking About You†. Stanford Law Review 52 (2000): 144-147.