The Problem Of Energy Production - 1870 Words

In today’s society, it’s nearly impossible to open a newspaper, fire up a computer, or hold a conversation that isn’t someway related to energy. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution over a century and a half ago, nothing has been more pivotal to mankind’s rise to power as the apex species of planet earth. Had our ancestors not discovered the potential of using million year old plant and animal remains to create combustible power, the world would look very different. There is no denying that energy production is one of, if not, the most important developments in human history. After a hundred and fifty years of recklessly burning oil and coal, we find ourselves having to deal with the literal mess unforeseen by our industrious†¦show more content†¦There are dozens, if not hundreds of oil and coal alternatives that are being considered, however, while many options look promising in theory the overwhelming majority of them such as: wind, solar, and biofuel just aren’t economically feasible on a global scale. Nuclear power is growing in popularity around the world for its extreme potency and zero emissions, but advancements in the field are few and far between due to the bad stigma that surrounds nuclear power. This negative stigma stems from its military roots and its potential for catastrophic disaster, which has become very real in the wake of Japan’s recent natural disasters. The answer to kicking our oil habit may actually be much simpler than any of these other alternatives. The key to securing our energy independence may have been under our feet the entire time we were bending to the oil cartel’s (OPEC’s) every demand. Here in America we have been sitting atop a goldmine of natural gas wells that rank among the most abundant in the world. While natural gas is by no means a renewable source of energy, reserves are much more plentiful in America than oil. Natural gas also burns much cleaner than coal making it friendlier to our heavily burdened atmosphere. Current estimates put our nation’s natural gas supply somewhere around â€Å"twenty five hundred trillion cubic feet of technically recoverable natural gas from all sources† (Deutch, 2011). Approximately six hundred to seven hundred cubic feet lies

Bloom’s Research and Response Free Essays

Bloom’s Research and Response Bloom’s Research and Response Benjamin Bloom developed Bloom’s Taxonomy of Education in 1956. It is a teaching system developed to classify learning objectives and skills (Larkin Burton, 2008). Lori Anderson and David Krathwohl revised the original publication- Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational objectives and also added new knowledge and ideas to the original material. We will write a custom essay sample on Bloom’s Research and Response or any similar topic only for you Order Now This is the handbook in use by educators today. The Educational objectives that Bloom developed he categorized into three domains: Cognitive, Affective, and Psychomotor. Each domain has its own set of specific expectations. Bloom broke down his taxonomy into different levels of complexity. They are arraigned in a hierarchy from less to more complex. When teaching, the educator will use the levels so that mastery of the first level is necessary by the learner before the next level can be achieved. The Cognitive Domain focuses on knowledge and developing the skills of comprehension, it also uses critical thinking skills. There are six levels of complexity in this Domain: Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis, and Evaluation. The Affective Domain focuses on how the learner deals with emotions and with his ability to feel empathy for others. Bloom broke down this domain into five levels: Receiving (awareness), Responding (active participation in the learning process), Valuing, Organization, and Internalizing (values held that influence a behavior so it becomes a characteristic). The third domain, the Psychomotor Domain was not broken down into subcategories by Bloom but by Simpson in 1972. The Psychomotor Domain focuses on the ability to manipulate an object physically. This domain has seven levels: Perception, Set (readiness to act), Guided Response, Mechanism, Complex Overt Response (the ability to perform without hesitation), Adaptation, and Origination. When used, Bloom’s Taxonomy will provide the educator with a measurable way to assess the level of comprehension of the taught information by the learner (â€Å"Big Dog and Little Dog’s Performance Juxtaposition,† 2010). Nurses can use Bloom’s teaching method in educating patients with chronic diseases. First the nurse must assess the patient for level of understanding and readiness to learn. The nurse uses the Cognitive Domain to teach the patient about his specific disease and to facilitate understanding of all concepts associated with the disease and its treatments. In following the hierarchy the nurse would start with the simplest information and ideas and increase the complexity of the information after the patient has exhibited comprehension of the previously taught material. Using the Affective Domain the nurse helps the patient deal with his emotions related to his diagnosis and to attach a value to it. Once a patient has processed the information given to him, realizes the importance of managing his care and placing a value on its importance, he is ready to use the psychomotor domain. The educator uses the Psychomotor domain to teach the skills portion of education. Diabetics need to learn how to use blood glucose testing equipment; patients may need to learn how to self-catheterize these are just two examples of skills that nurses teach that fall under this domain. There are many areas of education a nurse teaches daily. One of which is the information given to patients with chronic diseases in order for them to achieve or maintain self-sufficiency. Bloom’s teaching method gives those patients the best chance at mastering the necessary information and skills needed to live day-to-day with a chronic illness. References Big Dog and Little Dog’s Performance Juxtaposition. (2010). Retrieved from http://www. nwlink. com/~donclark/hrd/bloom. html Larkin, B. G. , Burton, K. J. (2008, September). Evaluating a Case Study Using Bloom’s Taxonomy of Education. AORN Journal, 88(3), 390-402 How to cite Bloom’s Research and Response, Essays

Cult of Personality free essay sample

Throughout time, some leaders managed to create an aura around themselves which has made them more respected and loved by their followers. These leaders are called cult of personalities. Thesis statement: Despite its changing meaning over time, the term cult of personality was and is being used to define leaders who have successfully created a public image of charisma and used their image to make their followers believe that they are working towards a common goal for their own benefits. . The Change of Meaning of the Term Cult of Personality A. The term was used to describe dictators of totalitarian regimes that managed to create positive public emotions about themselves B. Currently, the term is used to describe charismatic leaders regardless of nature of intentions II. How a Leader Creates his/her Personality Cult A. Cult of personalities dress according to the periodic fashion trends to create an ideal image of themselves B. Cult of personalities create a caring and thoughtful image of themselves to make the public think that they are being thought of and being looked after C. Cult of personalities put or at least how that they put their peoples need ahead of their own needs Ill. The Dangers and Benefits of Existence of a Personality Cult A. The public has an image to look up to and an example to be like B. The cult of personality becomes a hope for the citizens and their self-confidence is raised C. There becomes a mutual value that holds the society together D.Since the public thinks their leader is working for themselves, they can be fooled and be blind to evil doings of the leader, and even contribute to their dangerous objectives E. The public might fanatically protect the leader and fail to see the mistakes ND therefore fail to correct it. Conclusion Despite being a bonding effect, entity of a cult of personality is dangerous since it might cause the public to fall in love with the ruler to the limit that they might miss that they are being used to reach an unethical and selfish goal: power. Every society has a leader.Since the beginning of human history there are examples of leaders who are loved, some of them feared, some respected; and some of them a combination of these. Some leaders have created such a powerful aura around themselves that they have been remembered and appreciated long after their time; people never forget what he/she means for them and even after his/her death, continue to love and support them to an extent that is similar to religious worship. These leaders who have been successful in creating a powerful charismatic entity are considered to have a cult of personality.In this paper, the aim is to inform the reader about the term cult of personality; how it evolved, how leaders who are defined as cult of personality create this and also if this is beneficial or harmful by using specific examples; namely John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Eva Person and Mustang Kamala Taurus. At first, the term cult of personality was used to describe dictators of totalitarian regimes that sought to radically alter or transform society according to radical ideas (Cult of Personality). A well-known example that matches this definition is Stalin. Stalin reconstructed the Soviet regime so that man serves communism rather than communism serves man as it was under Linens control (Youthfulness). However, in time, the definition changed. Today, the meaning that is in use is synonymous to a charismatic leader, regardless of the kind of ideologies that the leader has or or whom they work themselves or the members of the society. As mentioned above, three example leaders that will be further examined in this paper are Eva Person, Mustang Kamala Taurus and John Fitzgerald Kennedy, all famous worldwide.People accept them as heroes without giving much thought to what they have really accomplished. All of these three people were powerful political figures in their own countries, namely Argentina (By 28, She Had Set), Turkey and the United States of America (Willets 260). They were loved by the majority of their people, and even after their death are embedded with deep respect and almost fanatical love. (By 28, She Had Set). The self-images that these leaders created in the peoples eyes and their actions have made the public almost fall in love with them, and blindly follow them and their ideologies.They are like Hollywood stars, idols for the public; in some cases thought of as a parent to the citizens, caring for them and nourishing their needs in a way that has never been done before. Therefore, these three leaders are most suitable to explain the term cult of personality. All three of these personality cults have common characteristics. Firstly, all here of them pay great attention to their physical appearance. All three are known for being very stylishly fashionable, dressing according to the popular European fashion of their time. Eva Person, with her Parisian outfits, mink fur, diamonds, blonde-dyed hair and red lipstick, knew that the public wanted her to be beautiful, as she stated in her own words. (By 28, She Had Set). John F. Kennedy, with his way of dressing (Stark) and his beautiful wife who was a fashion icon of her era (Willets 263), put forward a glamorous style. Taurus, with his very well tailored Western clothes (Popper 55) is still respected by Turkish citizens for looking smart and fashionable.The style of these leaders has dollied them, as they dressed as how the average person wanted to. Secondly, they portray themselves as caring and emphatic, to make their people feel as fifthly are being watched after like children. In a way, they are being a parent to the nation. They all defend the poor, and therefore loved by them, and since the poor is the vast majority of the population, they become favored by the population. For example Kennedy worked really hard on workers rights, and gained their love and respect (Willets 264).Similar to that, Eva Person Foundation, founded by Eva, helped millions of poor people and did the work that normally the state is entitled to do (Foss 1 With her husband, she gave the Decrescendos the shirtless ones- the support they had never seen by giving them rights (Richards and Riley 127) and help through the Eva Person Foundation (Foss 1 Taurus gave the Turkish citizens something they never had, democracy, and educated them about its importance (Mustang Kamala That;ark. ). With their caring attitude towards the public, they are still commemorated literally as parents.Eva Person became Vita and little mother (By 28, She Had Set) whereas Mustang Kamala became Taurus elder Turk. Thirdly, cults of personality show that they are understanding and sacrificing. Person listened to the citizens and granted their wishes, she is even known to give fifty percent rise to workers when they asked for forty percent (By 28, She Had Set). Even during sickness, Person refused to rest. (By 28, She Had Set). Even their early deaths helped their images as leaders, and they became martyrs who died on duty.Kennedy was assassinated during a public rally (Willets 266), Vita died of Uterus cancer hen she was only 33 and while she was still the first lady (By 28, She Had Set), and Taurus died of cirrhosis at 57 during his term as the president (Mustang Kamala That;ark. Wisped). So, with their sacrifices these leaders made their people in a way entitled to continue defending their ideals and loving them. The factors that give a leader the personality cult are these. However, the question that has to be answered is: is presence of one dangerous or beneficial?Since cults of personality are generally apparent in totalitarian regimes (Wiggeries 8), this type of leader is considered ungenerous by intellectuals such as Marx (Daniels 212). However today it may be concluded that leaders such as Taurus have accomplished success using it in a positive way. Presence of a cult of personality gives people an ideal to look up to. In Turkish schools, still children are taught to admire and be like Taurus, and his values are still important throughout the society, and look as if they will be protected further.Kennedys charm and wits were characteristics that every American would like to be born with (Steel 24). Someone to look up to makes the society act more ethically, and therefore rates a healthier social environment. As people look up to someone who has come from within themselves, they develop a hope that someday they will accomplish things. For instance, Person is from a low class herself (By 28, She Had Set), and her moral and economic support to the poor gave them something to work for. On the other hand, Kennedy was from a wealthy background, he had high quality education and his family was portrayed as being perfect.Therefore J. F. Kennedy was the true adaptation of the American Dream itself to real life (Willets, 261-262), he proved to Americans hat dreams can come true. With Taurus making his cultural revolutions and showing them to the public to be for their own benefit, modernization became another reason for thanking Taurus (Outwits). Also by winning the Independence War, the Turkish nation began re-believing in itself. Memento of the independence war, tenacity and insistence are still common characteristic of Turkish people, and that is another thing a cult of personality creates: common values.The values and changes that a cult of personality brings to a society become mutual values of that society which hold it together. For example, in the Turkish society vast majority of Turkish people like Taurus, so no matter which class and background they are from, their Seemliest ideology makes them get along well (Mustang Kamala That;ark. ). On the other hand, existence of cult of personalities has negative sides too. Firstly, if the public loves the leader too much, they might fail to realize how they are being led toward an action they would not normally do, if they could see what it really is.They might be fooled into being blind to the unacceptable doings of the cult of personality. For instance, Kennedy nearly led his country awards a conflict with Cuba when he ordered marines to quarantine Cuba when the Soviets did not accept to take back their missiles (Willets 265). Person favored her family and gave them high-ranking job positions, spent millions for her personal jewelry, caused inflation and under her ruling educated civilians started getting the same salary with untrained workers (By 28, She Had Set).As it can be seen, the public fails to see the corruption of these leaders when there is a personality cult existence. Secondly, the over fanatical love felt toward the leader prevents his/her mistakes from getting erected. Normally, when there is a problem in a ruling system, it is fixed or at least tried to be fixed within the next generations. But since the cult of personality is over-respected, it is possible that even in the next generation mistakes can be continued to be made. Also modernization and new adaptations might be harder to apply to the society.In conclusion, every society needs a leader. From time to time along comes a leader who has the power to make-believe people that they are worthy again, and this way he/ she gains respect and popularity that continues even after their death. Despite the fact that existence of a cult of personality makes it easier for the society to work towards a common goal, it is at the same time very dangerous, since it can trick people to do things they would not normally do. The occurrence of a cult of personality can be blinding.If the leader has good intentions this blinding can be positive but if the leader has selfish intentions, this blinding might even lead the society to self-destruction, and even mass massacres. Human beings should make their own decisions with their own judgments, and not leave this responsibility to their leaders, even if the traders are making decisions that are good for the people. The only factor that should manipulate a persons decisions is that persons own will.