Alex Haley Documenting History

Analysis of Friedrich Nietzsche´s Book 5 of The Gay...

Friedrich Nietzsche’s own skepticism symbolized the secular changes in contemporary Western civilization, in which he details mankind’s break away from faith into a new rule of chaos. In Book 5 of The Gay Science, Nietzsche establishes that â€Å"God is dead†, meaning that modern Europe has abandoned religion in favor of rationality and science (Nietzsche 279). From this death, the birth of a ‘new’ infinite blossoms in which the world is open to an unlimited amount of interpretations that do not rely on the solid foundations of faith in religion or science. However, in contrast to the other philosophers of his age such as Immanuel Kant and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Nietzsche deviates from the omniscient determinism of history towards a†¦show more content†¦Despite such claims, Nietzsche criticizes this mistaken idea that the knowledge of the universe can be comprehended by any method; he argues that not even the â€Å"most scrupulously conscientious analysis and self-examination of the intellect† cannot successfully interpret the progressive history of the world as â€Å"the human intellect cannot avoid seeing itself in [only] its perspectives† (Nietzsche 336). To Nietzsche, Kant and Hegel’s attempts to find truth in history is faulty because faith is just now found in science and reasoning rather than religion. What Kant and Hegel fail to realize is that the human race’s separation from this faith gave rise to â€Å"our new ‘infinite’†, in which â€Å"the world has become ‘infinite’ for [humanity] all over again, inasmuch as we cannot reject the possibility that it may include infinite interpretations† (Nietzsche 336). Thus the new infinite is self-consciously made by the individual members of humanity itself, as we can now independently interpret the world ourselves as we see fit. Nietzsche declares that even if some of these interpretations ma y include â€Å"too much devilry, stupidity and foolishness†, it does not matter because it does not rely on faith (Nietzsche 336). The new infinite that arises is ours, in which the abundance of perspectives is too overwhelming for any scholar to give meaning to such chaos. There is no logical reason how such disorder shouldShow MoreRelatedExistentialism vs Essentialism23287 Words   |  94 Pages------------------------------------------------- Essentialism vs. Existentialism Essentialism: A belief that things have a set of characteristics that make them what they are, amp; that the task of science and philosophy is their discovery amp; expression; the doctrine that essence is prior to existence While, Existentialism:A philosophical theory or approach, that emphasizes the existence of the individual person as a free amp; responsibleRead Morewisdom,humor and faith19596 Words   |  79 Pageslinks) Walter G. Moss 1 Table of Contents (with links) 1 Wisdom, Perspective, and Values 2 Humor’s Contribution to Wisdom 4 Humor and Wisdom in Europe: Some Highlights 5 Renaissance Humor: Erasmus, Rabelais, Cervantes, Shakespeare 5 Two European Russians: Anton Chekhov and Vladimir Soloviev 9 Reflections on Humor from Nietzsche to the Theatre of the Absurd 12 Humor and Wisdom in the United States: Lincoln, Beecher, Twain, Sandburg, and Buchwald 17 From The Times (of London) obituary on him (JanuaryRead MoreStephen P. Robbins Timothy A. Judge (2011) Organizational Behaviour 15th Edition New Jersey: Prentice Hall393164 Words   |  1573 Pagesmechanical, photocopying, recording, or likewise. To obtain permission(s) to use material from this work, please submit a written request to Pearson Education, Inc., Permissions Department, One Lake Street, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458, or you may fax your request to 201-236-3290. Many of the designations by manufacturers and sellers to distinguish their products are claimed as trademarks. Where those designations appear in this book, and the publisher was aware of a trademark claim, the designations

Biography of William Steele Sessions Free Essays

On May 27, 1930 in Fort Smith, Arizona William Steele Sessions was born. This future Director of the FBI and Federal Judge however did not grow up in the Arizona area. Shortly after his birth his family moved to Kansas City, Kansas (â€Å"1988 Yearbook† 1988). We will write a custom essay sample on Biography of William Steele Sessions or any similar topic only for you Order Now This is where William attended his entire grade school career. Instead of following his father’s footsteps of being a minister, William chose to enlist in the Air Force. In 1951 shortly after he graduated high school William enlisted. He was commissioned in 1952 and served as an airborne radar intercept instructor until his service was up in 1955, he had acquired the rank of captain in those four years. During those four years in the Air Force, Mr. Sessions fell in love and married. Her name was Alice June Lewis. Upon his leaving the Air Force, the couple moved to Waco, Texas where he then began attending Baylor University. He received his bachelors of arts in 1956 and then immediately began attending Baylor University School of Law, which he graduated in 1958 with a law degree. Once Texas placed William on the states bar he went into private practice, which he continued until 1969 (â€Å"The FBI: A Comprehensive Reference Guide† 1999). With the Sessions private law practice doing well and with him gaining recognition, Mr. Sessions was appointed Chief of government operations section, in the Criminal Division of the U. S. Department of Justice and remained there until 1971 (â€Å"Judges of the United States Courts† 2000). So with his career really starting to take off there didn’t seem much more he could do, but in 1971 Mr. Sessions had been appointed U. S. Attorney for the Western District of Texas and along with that, the President at the time, Gerald Ford, placed Mr. Sessions to be district judge for that Western District. He served in the city of El Paso until December of 1979, which he was then transferred to San Antonio to replace the assassinated District Judge John H. Wood. That following year in February he was named Chief Judge and would be until his appointment to the FBI in 1987. During the twelve years William Sessions was on the U. S. District Court for the Western District of Texas he had earned a reputation for being tough, but hair in law and order justice. He received a great deal of attention in 1982 when he gave stiff sentences to five convicted conspirators that were involved in the 1979 murder of his own colleague, John Wood Jr. , the only federal judge to be assassinated in U. S. history (â€Å"1988 Yearbook† 1988). William Sessions was at the height of his career when on July 24, 1987 President Regan named him to be Director of the FBI. On September 25 of that year the senate gave Mr. Sessions a unanimous vote for him to become Director and on November 2 he took the oath of office. So now that he was in the ultimate position what was he to do? To start off on the right foot, William’s first move was to reorganize the bureau’s senior staff. He created a new post, deputy director, which carried the responsibility of day-to-day operations and the deputy was assisted by two associate deputy directors (â€Å"The FBI: A Comprehensive Reference Guide† 1999). Next on his list was that with the Cold War no longer in existence, Mr. Sessions redeployed the agents formerly engaged in counterintelligence work to handle violent and white-collar crimes. Another reason for this move was in response to a forty percent increase over ten years of violent crimes. He designated the investigation of violent crime the FBI’s sixth national priority in 1989, and by November 1991 the FBI created â€Å"Operation Safe Street†, in Washington, D. C. It was a concept of federal, state, and local police task forces targeting fugitives and gangs. With the successes of this operation the FBI was ready to expand the operational assistance to police nationwide (â€Å"A Short History of the FBI† 2000). In addition to this fight toward violent crime, on April 18, 1988, Director Sessions jump-started the Drug Demand Reduction Program by placing the program in important sections of the FBI. Those sections were the research unit and the office of congressional and public affairs (â€Å"The FBI: A Comprehensive Reference Guide† 1999). He felt it would prove very useful to have the program instilled in these sections. The purpose of this program was for FBI offices nationwide to begin working closely with local school and civic groups to educate young people on the dangers of drugs. As a result of the community outreach efforts under the program separate ideas branched off into systems such as Adopt-A-School and Junior G-Man programs, all involved in the education of drug dangers (â€Å"A Short History of the FBI† 2000). Probably Director Sessions greatest accomplishment while he was with the FBI was how he dealt with the problem of discrimination with in the bureau. In 1990 a survey of the Bureau Employees, which was requested by Director Sessions, found a majority of FBI employees were dissatisfied with bureau personnel practices, especially with assignments and promotions. The unhappiness was widespread starting among blacks, Hispanics, women and then white males. Seventy percent of these people believed promotions were unfair and given to unqualified agents. The survey also found discrimination due to a person’s race, color, national origin, religion, disability, sex or age. Along with that finding it found that women felt â€Å"the old boy network† was keeping them from assignments. While in the white males it was found they felt the effects of reverse discrimination. So after all of these findings Director Sessions made minority recruitment a top priority (â€Å"The FBI: A Comprehensive Reference Guide† 1999). He made it a top priority by instituting strong affirmative action hiring policies and measures to remedy past discrimination, as well as, revising the FBI applicant tests to ensure fairness in the selection process (â€Å"The FBI: A Comprehensive Reference Guide† 1999). It seems that all leaders at some point in there tenure are involved in some situation that attracts national attention. In Director Sessions case, there were two such events. These situations had a major impact on FBI policies and operations. First was the FBI’s response to the shooting death of Deputy U. S. Marshal William Degan. He was killed at Ruby Ridge, Idaho while he was on a surveillance detail of federal fugitive Randall Weaver. During the standoff Weaver’s wife was accidentally shot and killed by an FBI sniper. The result of that was Weaver and his children received a money settlement for the FBI’s mistake (â€Å"A Short History of the FBI† 2000). The second event was the fifty-one day standoff with a religious sect located just outside of Waco, Texas. Members of the sect had killed four ATF officers along with wounding many others. Instead of successfully ending the standoff the agents could only watch in horror as the compound burnt to the ground (â€Å"A Short History of the FBI† 2000). These two unfortunate events set up public and congressional inquires into the FBI’s ability to respond to crisis situations. So in the end these horrible events could ultimately benefit the agency by weeding out flaws in their policies. Along with having these large situations arise, in 1993 Director Sessions was criticized within the FBI for violations, by his wife and assistant Sarah Munford, of Bureau regulations, federal and state laws. The violations were minor breaches of security by Mrs. Sessions and Mr. Sessions was also involved in most of these violations. Some examples of Director Sessions abuses and neglects ranged from his home alarm system did not alert the FBI and his fencing was not that government provided security enhanced wrought iron fence (Robins 1993). The Director was entirely inconsistent in his actions with respect to accepting the advice of the Bureau’s professionals. This shows a clear pattern of his taking advantage of the government and his position. Some more examples of his abuses are: using an FBI plane to haul firewood from New York Cit to Washington, Carried an unloaded gun in the trunk of his car in order to classify it as a â€Å"law enforcement vehicle† so he could avoid paying taxes on the cost of driving to work, and may have obtained a sweetheart deal from a Washington bank on a $375,000 home mortgage (Sachs 1993). That is just a couple of the abuses Mr. Sessions committed. Mrs. Sessions did not help the abuses either. Along with the abuses stated earlier, Sachs states that she used bureau cars as transportation to get her hair and nails done (1993). Among other things she on numerous occasions barged in on official business, which obviously caused a great disturbance. As a result of all of these ethical charges, they led to intense resentment of a double standard in the highly disciplined agency where agents are routinely punished for minor infractions (Sachs 1993). So in the end President Clinton asked Mr. Sessions to resign, but he refused which ultimately resulted in his termination on July 19, 1993. President Clinton stated â€Å"his greatest accomplishment was getting more women and minorities into the agency† (Sachs 1993). Today Mr. And Mrs. Sessions reside in San Antonio, Texas where he is in private law practice with his sons. So as we have seen Mr. Sessions seemed to be headed in the right way with this agency, but for some reason or another ran into some rough waters. In the beginning of his career with the FBI Mr. Sessions had the right idea; it was a time for change in most law enforcement communities. Mr. Sessions had picked the most widely known and most prestigious one to change. So his steps toward equal and diverse employment were very excellent. Also he showed he had the knowledge for reallocating resources when they were not needed anymore as in with the Cold War agents and placing them on something that needed attention, white collar crime and street violence. Where Mr. Sessions fails is in his tactical knowledge. For example with Waco and Ruby Ridge, if he had known what to do tactically in those situations mistakes might not have taken place. Another problem could have been that he hadn’t surrounded himself with people that could handle those specific situations. As a result things did eventually change. Mr. Sessions had a great knowledge of the federal law and how to go about enforcing it at a court level, but to do that right at the enforcement level is totally different. That kind of knowledge allows for a good internal management style not an external one. So in agreement with President Clinton former Director William Sessions greatest achievement with this agency was improving the organizations recruitment to avoid discrimination. How to cite Biography of William Steele Sessions, Essay examples

Neoliberalism in Latin America free essay sample

From the 1930s until the 1980s state intervention and protection were key components of most Latin American economies. In these years many Latin American countries were used an Import-substitution industrialization based economy trying to reduce dependence on foreign imports and replacing them with domestic production. Due to the use of an Import-substitution industrialization based economy Latin American countries were forced to keep high tariffs to protect the private companies of their countries. This combined with many Latin America countries providing numerous government subsidized programs eventually led to the 1982 debt crisis. This debt crisis created a vacuum affect in Latin America with many of the countries taking on a new neoliberal economic model, and by the early 1990s John Charles Chasteen claims that almost every Latin American country was led by a president that was pro neoliberalism. This neoliberal economic model called for the slashing of tariffs as well as the reduction of removal of all nationalist-inspired subsides. Also following the neoliberal model, Latin American countries stopped the printing of money to slow inflation effectively undermining the functionality of their local markets. All of this was done so that a completely â€Å"free market† could be created. It was believed that this free market would not only help improve the economies of Latin American countries, but also create more personal freedoms for the people of Latin America. In the article â€Å"Neoliberalism, Neoclassicism and Economic Welfare†, John T. Harvey claims the complete opposite, arguing although a neoliberal economic model was created to produce conditions conducive to social provisioning or democratic problem solving, the exact opposite has occurred. Harvery states in his article, â€Å"Instead of growth, stability, and the narrowing of income gaps, we have seen stagnation, volatility, and increased inequality. † By researching neoliberalism a clear picture can be drawn. Neoliberalism created class stratification with the upper and middle class greatly benefiting from the new policies sanctioned by neoliberalism, while the poor continued to become more impoverished and unable to provide for themselves. Many historians argue that the neoliberal economic model was most beneficial for the small wealthy upper-class of Latin America as well as many upper-class business owners from other countries. The existence of a â€Å"free market† due to neoliberalism in Latin America created many opportunities for upper-class citizens to continue to become considerably wealthier. The upper-class benefit from neoliberalism in many ways but the two largest benefits come from the privatization of government subsidized programs and the lowering of tariffs. Not only did both of these policies line the pockets of the upper-class of Latin America but foreign investors as well. In order to balance their federal budget many Latin American governments privatized their government subsidized programs as well as cut federal jobs. First, the privatization of federal jobs allowed many upper-class citizens to take over these businesses and use them in their benefit to create capital. Former government projects such as constructing roads and government buildings were now being completed by companies that were owned by the upper-class. Prior to neoliberalism these jobs were paid out of the federal budget and were used as a way to lower unemployment by hiring more workers than were really needed. Now that private companies were doing the work efficiency was the most important thing leading to the loss of many jobs for the poor class of Latin America. In the article, â€Å"Neo-Liberalism in Latin America: Limits and Alternatives† Ian Roxborough argues that the immediate beneficiaries of the privatization of government subsidized programs and federal jobs, or what he calls real assets, were foreign investors and people with â€Å"flight cash†. This was because when these programs became privatized upper-class people from other countries as well as Latin America were able to come in and by penny cheap shares of these programs and soon to be private companies. This excrementally helped the upper-class because after they bought this stock at largely discounted prices it quickly grew in value. Clearly, lower classes that did not have extra cash could not benefit from this because they were unable to purchase any of the shares of these newly privatized commodities. This created two problems, not only did real assets of Latin America get lost to upper-class foreign investors, it also created a significantly larger wealth gap between the poor and upper-class because of the large amounts of money the upper-class made from the gains of the stock that they bought at such cheap prices. Another benefit the upper-class of Latin America and other foreign countries gained from neoliberalism was the reduction of tariffs. The reduction of Tariffs allowed foreign companies to come into Latin America and build maquiladoras. This was beneficial for the foreign investors because they could now come into Latin America where working wages were much cheaper and produce their goods at lower prices, which entail created more profit. Lower tariffs were beneficial for Latin American upper-class citizens because as the foreign companies came into Latin America they were able to invest in these companies. The ability to invest in these companies that wouldn’t have come to Latin America with the previous tariffs was just one more way people who already had money in Latin America were able to benefit even more from a neoliberal economic model. Neoliberalism also benefitted the middle class of Latin America. Chasteen argues the middle class benefited from a neoliberal economic model because of the cheap products that were produced due to the maquiladoras in Latin America as well as cheap products that were being imported to Latin America because of the newly reduced tariffs. This was very beneficial for the middle class for two reasons. First, under neoliberalism the middle class society who had money to spend, now had more choices because the large influx of items that were now being imported into Latin America. In his article, â€Å"Magical Neoliberalism†, Alberto Fuguet argues that neoliberalism was what led to amenities like large scale movies from Hollywood and other services, like fast food chains, to come to Latin America. Secondly, neoliberalism was beneficial to the middle class because with a larger selection of goods comes competition. With competition companies foreign and local now had to produce the best quality goods at the lowest price in order to continue to receive business from the middle class. Neoliberalism also benefited the middle class of Latin America because of the advancement in technology that occurred because of the privatization of water resource centers, electrical companies, and telecommunication companies. The privatization of these companies allowed them to modernize as well as make them more reliable. Some argue that neoliberalism was also beneficial for the women of Latin America. In her article â€Å"Love in the Time of Neo-Liberalism: Gender, Work, and Power in a Costa Rican Marriage†, Susan E. Mannon argues neoliberalism allowed women to gain more power and independence then they previously had. Mannon claims that neoliberalism, and the reduced tariffs that come with it, led to the creation of maquiladoras where women could seek employment. Latin American women’s new ability to gain employment in maquiladoras allowed them to earn a wage creating dual-income households. Not only did this give them more power and independence in their individual households, but the ability to buy goods also allowed them to participate in the local economy giving them more power as well. Those who stood to gain the least under a neoliberal economic model were the poor people of Latin America. This is because the privatization of state-run corporations and public service programs made them unaffordable for the poor working class, leaving many homeless and hungry. In the article, â€Å"From Democracy to Development: The Political Economy of Post-Neoliberal Reform in Latin America†, Alfred P. Montero states claims that neoliberalism leads to deepening levels of inequality, a growing percentage of people living below the poverty line, decaying infrastructure, poor access to even low-quality primary education, rising criminality, and inefficient productivity. All of these problems can be linked to privatization of government subsidized programs and the loss of government jobs. With neoliberalism the loss of jobs and government programs made unemployment skyrocket and education too expensive for much of the poor class of Latin America to afford. This lack of education is what many argue led to the problems that Montero claims such as a rise in criminal activity. Also, because neoliberalism privatizes companies that control commodities such as water, telecommunications, and electricity the poor class was unable to afford them, essentially leaving the poor of Latin America in the dark without water or electricity. Neoliberalism also led to the creation of Maquiladora’s which initially created what poor Latin American believed to be desirable jobs. Quickly the poor found out that many of these jobs did not pay a wage that was enough for a person to survive. With the poor pay of maquiladoras also came very poor working conditions that were conducive to creating injury. Omar Gil a former maquiladora worker stated in an interview that his first maquiladora job paid him a dismal forty dollars a week in working conditions that were less than safe. Omar attested that maquiladora workers were injured often because of the intense pressure of Forman’s to produce as much product as possible. Also with neoliberalism came the lack of available occupations. Due to the reduction of tariffs foreign companies were able to bring mass produced goods into Latin American countries at prices cheaper than local inhabitants were able to produce them. This created large scale unemployment and forced Latin American people into the unsafe and low paying maquiladoras. Chasteen argues that for the poor class the inability to produce goods far outweighed the benefits of being able to be a small-time consumer from the dismal wages that were earned in maquiladoras. It is clear that the neoliberal economic model is not beneficial for anyone but the wealthy elites and middle class of Latin American Countries. A neoliberal economic model became fashionably popular in Latin America because the people who were in charge were upper-class citizens and during a down turn in 1982 neoliberalism seemed like a solution due to its approach to better balance the budget of Latin American countries. Unfortunately, either the leadership of these countries assumed wrong, or just didn’t care about the wellbeing of its impoverished people, but clearly a neoliberal economic model does nothing but create a larger wealth gap, create more social stratification, and deplete living conditions for the poor even more. In the article, â€Å"Exploring the Impact of Neoliberal Economic Development on Poverty in Costa Rica: What Went Wrong? †, Paul B Lubliner argues that in order for economic prosperity to complement poverty reduction the state should have more control over the economy not less. I agree and argue by privatizing all state subsidized programs as well as depleting the amount of government jobs to almost zero Latin American countries actually went backwards in their pursuit to shorten the wealth gap as well as social stratification. Abusing your population to closer balance budget is in no way the solution to guarantee countries prosperity in the foreseeable future. Neoliberalism was clearly one sided only benefiting the rich and middle class, disfranchising each countries poor setting them back further then they were before.