| Papers [161-170] of 4546 :: [Page 17 of 455] | | Go to page : <— 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 —> | |
|
|
Corporate Ethics, 2008.
This paper explores the philosophy of ethics and its relevance in the corporate sphere.
3,940 words (approx. 15.8 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 107.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper focuses on philosophical studies on ethics and the way in which conceptions of ethics can be seen to be tied to an understanding of human nature. The paper explores the beliefs of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Plato and Immanuel Kant and develops a trajectory of philosophical thought which could hold the answer to determining absolute moral right and, as a consequence, the grounds for unfailing compliance. The paper considers the implications of this reasoning for the corporate sphere and particularly on the contents and effectiveness of corporate codes of conduct.
From the Paper
"In the wake of corporate scandals, such as Enron and the Martha Stewart trial, which have, in recent years, captured international attention and media coverage, corporate ethics has become a household term. What corporate ethics entails, how these standards are created and maintained, and whether anyone actually pays any attention to them at all has been the subject of much interest and debate. It may be assumed that the aforementioned scandals could justifiably cause the layman to believe that the notion of corporate ethics is a mere chimera, something to which organizations pay lip service to ease the minds of stockholders as well as customers. On the other hand, the public nature of such scandals has put corporations and other large organizations in the position of being forced to discuss these matters openly and to give account of their own practices."
| |
|
Can We Know Anything Independently of Experience?, 2008.
A discussion detailing the processes in which a person acquires knowledge.
1,219 words (approx. 4.9 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper questions the manner in which we obtain knowledge and refers to intuition, experience and the senses as sources of knowledge. The paper proposes that the things that we are aware of are not entirely dependent on the senses but rather from experience that starts with the senses. Continuing on this theme, the paper states that children have the ability to acquire knowledge but that this has to be done through a learning process, the first of which is through the senses. The paper concludes that knowledge is obtained through custom or repetition, intuition and imagination.
From the Paper
"The most important issues we will ever encounter concern the ultimate questions such as those pertaining to God and life after death. Of these matters we can have no sensory information and experience is utterly useless. When sensory impressions are present, the only purpose they serve is as a springboard for reasoning. However, a priori reasoning is possible, as is observed in mathematics. Certain types of knowledge are outside the sphere of all experience and also are beyond the realm of the senses (Kant 184). A priori knowledge is certain and progresses in a logical manner; such is the case with mathematical propositions which are never based in experience and instead are based in necessity. Propositions in the natural sciences also are a priori and necessary as well as synthetic. Kant (188) uses as one example of such propositions "that in all communication of motion, action and reaction must always be equal". The principles of a priori knowledge only have one source which is the faculty of reason. The only means through which we can know anything a priori is pure reason."
| |
|
Revisionist Vs. Revolutionary Marxism, 2008.
An analysis of the tensions between revisionist and revolutionary Marxism.
1,211 words (approx. 4.8 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper identifies the most significant tension between revolutionary and revisionist Marxism that was a fundamental disagreement over how to rid the world of capitalism and replace it with communism. The paper explains that revolutionary Marxists believed that communism could only be achieved through violent upheaval or revolution, while revisionist Marxists believed that communism could be achieved through gradual and peaceful means.
From the Paper
"As is the case with every ideology, the central and significant tensions within Marxism can be identified in terms of their different prescriptions for political life. Revolutionary Marxists believed in the prescription for revolution formulated by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in The Communist Manifesto, which called for the overthrow of capitalist governments in Europe by the working class.
"Marx expected The Communist Manifesto to trigger revolution across Europe and believed he would be able to contribute directly to the triumph of communism through the fiery rhetoric of the Manifesto. He proclaimed that, "the immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all other proletarian parties: formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, and conquest of political power by the proletariat." (Marx and Engels)"
| |
|
My Ideology, 2008.
Looks at the author's own ideology called conservative liberal or a liberal conservative.
1,910 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 13 sources, MLA, $ 60.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper, the author relates that he adheres to the ideology of conservative liberalism to the exclusion of socialism, communism, anarchism, fascism or Nazism. The author further relates his belief that this ideology combines the openness and willingness to experiment of liberalism and the caution of classical conservatism. In addition, the author explains that he bases this selection on his view of human nature. The author then concludes that, almost by elimination, he chooses liberalism, thus favoring a government in which the will of the government can be expressed through change.
From the Paper
"This concept of liberty helps to shape the corresponding concept of security. The security that the state must offer is twofold. First, it must protect the whole of society from external invasion. We have managed to do this successfully in the repulse of the attack of the Plu-Turns, and we must retain a government of sufficient strength and foresight to repel any future invasion. At the same time, the government must secure the individuals in our society from internal oppression. In our recovery, we will undoubtedly go through periods of severe economic dislocation."
| |
|
Plato's Cave and Individualism, 2008.
This paper discusses Plato's allegory of the cave and the group think mentality common in organizations today.
1,468 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper analyzes the dangers inherent in blind obedience and group think as illustrated in Plato's allegory of the cave. The paper discusses the relevance of the allegory to contemporary organizational law by drawing upon the author's experiences as a member of law enforcement. The paper then looks at the mechanisms that we use to avoid or subvert ideas that appear different from our own and challenge the status quo. The paper concludes that we must embrace different ideas and nurture a respect for different cultures and world views.
From the Paper
"Plato's allegory of the cave captures the essence of organizational culture. Obviously, the ideology of sameness and normative thinking has transcended from Plato's time to today. Thus, the allegory is relevant to contemporary organizational life. Organizations are known for fostering a culture of group think. The dangers inherent in group think is the object lesson that Plato tries to convey. When we refuse to engage in critical thinking, we are goaded into a false sense of security, and create our own prison. The allegory of the cave is particularly relevant to corporate culture, and the blind obedience that is encouraged and often rewarded. There is an insidious force in organizational culture, which subsumes individualism for the corporate good. Like prisoners chained in a cave, employees have been trained to see through the lenses of the corporate image."
| |
|
The Limits of Mind: On the Fallacy of the Design Argument, 2008.
This paper critiques the design argument based on arguments from William Paley's "The Watch and the Watchmaker" and David Hume's "A Critique of the Design Argument".
2,040 words (approx. 8.2 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 64.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This essay critiques the design argument, as explained in both William Paley's "The Watch and the Watchmaker" and in David Hume's "A Critique of the Design Argument". This paper also explains the features of the design argument and evaluates the argument in order to critique it. The author follows Hume in suggesting that the design argument is ultimately a failure due to the massive egocentricity inherent in assuming that God can be understood through an analogy to the human mind.
From the Paper
"The reason I have been rather pedantic in deconstructing Paley's analogy is twofold. Firstly, we have the problem of Darwin's theory of evolution. That is to say, the theory that explains that the mechanism or process that makes things fit is intrinsic to the system of nature itself. If you wish, Darwin's theory of evolution is akin to showing that the watch really does produce the watch and is the only creator thereof. Whether Darwin believed that God made it so or not is irrelevant--the point is that God can be taken out of evolution and the underlying principle of nature shown to be merely survival, and the survival of those traits which help us survive. Naturally, this system creates something which looks like it has been designed--because we have adapted to our environments, not because we have been created alongside our environments as a system always already in perfect harmony. Again, I am not concerned to argue that this is so--but this is merely an instance of the observer coming upon the watch and having no knowledge of the manufacturing processes involved in the production of mechanical objects, assumes that this watch is something which just exists, with no thought or evidence of processes that were involved in making it, because his lack of understanding of the need for those processes means he doesn't recognize them. Paley's argument is that we know something has been designed, because we recognize that the process by which it is constructed is one that requires thought--by I am suggesting that, when it comes to nature, we cannot know what the process is that is required to construct it, and therefore we cannot arrive at any certain deduction as to its having been designed by the method Paley describes. In fact, as I have shown, the only theory that describes the process (of evolution and survival) that creates, or recreates, nature is one that does not need to rely on design--at least not in any sense which we can understand, which brings me to my second criticism of Paley's analogy."
| |
|
Human Rights as an Internal Affair, 2008.
This paper argues that human rights are not an internal state affair and rejects that attempting to impose universal human rights is simply Western cultural imperialism.
1,260 words (approx. 5.0 pages), 4 sources, APA, $ 42.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This essay argues that there are such things as universal human rights, and that when one state violates these, other states have a legitimate reason to raise appeal. The essay states that this can give rise to a tension between state autonomy and universal rights, however, it argues that this possibility must be endured, for the alternative is to allow people to be abused. Moreover, the paper asserts that there are practical steps that could be taken to encourage sovereign states to acknowledge universal human rights.
From the Paper
"The only difference between those who argued against suffrage in the West or against same-sex marriage in Canada, and those who today argue in favour of genital mutilation in Nigeria, is that the Western defenders of sexism and heterosexism claimed to speak for all of humanity, and for God, while the minorities claim only to speak for themselves, and sometimes for their own God - and of course, for "their women." The principle is the same - invoking culture, God, nature or tradition to justify oppression of women or other minorities, and in this way attempting to maintain the status quo. That argument was overcome in England and in Canada, and it should be overcome in non-Western nations too. Moreover, it is argued that if this poses some slight risk to the autonomy of some individual nations, then so be it. National autonomy should not extend to the point of giving ruling groups the right of torture, murder, mutilation or any other kind of violent abuse against individual human beings - not even if they are women or children!"
| |
|
Godwin's Anarchism, 2008.
A comparison of William Godwin's theories of anarchism to Karl Marx's beliefs about communism.
1,441 words (approx. 5.8 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses William Godwin's major work, "An Enquiry Concerning Political Justice", which is an early elucidation of the political theory of anarchism. The paper defines anarchism and then compares this work to Marx's "Capital" and "The Communist Manifesto". The paper explores why William Godwin's work has had less public exposure and popularity than either of Marx's works.
From the Paper
"While Karl Marx has become a famous thinker and philosopher through the wide dissemination of his two major works, Capital and The Communist Manifesto, a much lesser known figure has also contributed substantially to the perennial dialogue of radical political philosophies, and this man and his work is worthy of deeper analysis. This writer is William Godwin (1756-1836), who was nearly a contemporary of Marx and in his own way equally radical, yet significantly divergent in his thought. Godwin may be best known for having married the writer Mary Wollstonecraft, a groundbreaking feminist thinker in her own day, and for being the father of Mary Shelley of Frankenstein fame. Godwin's major work, An Enquiry Concerning Political Justice (1793) is an early elucidation of the political theory of anarchism, and is worth analyzing in terms of the similarities it shares with Marx's communism (Landry, para 16)."
| |
|
Freud and Nietzsche, 2008.
Compares Sigmund Freud and Friedrich Nietzsche's conceptions of the human self.
1,340 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 4 sources, APA, $ 45.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that both Freud and Nietzsche wrote at length about what it is that keeps people from achieving happiness and fulfillment. The author points out that, by rejecting the claims and holds of religion upon truth and its value in elevating the human condition, Freud and Nietzsche were revolutionaries. The paper suggests that, while both take similar approaches and appear to be judging the world from an objective standpoint, they both, especially Freud, clearly fall into their own subjective traps in delimiting the nature of the self, its habits, its inadequacies and its reason for being.
From the Paper
"Clearly, for Nietzsche, it is this desire to impose order upon the world that is the basic human drive, that which distinguishes people from animals, and is a basic need that all people share--which tells us why language exists, and science, and the law. This ability to impose an ordering on the world is what makes us human, the fundamental drive that creates order allows us to maintain that order and to be social beings. Perhaps it is the social aspect which is the real, underlying drive and which creates our need to believe that the world which surrounds us is classifiable, quantifiable and static."
| |
|
Donald Trump: A Representation of Capitalism, 2008.
This paper utilizes pop cultural figure Donald Trump as a case study in which to contrast capitalism and communism.
1,155 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 39.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper applies the ideological framework of the theory of communism, specifically as expounded by Karl Marx in "The Communist Manifesto" to the contemporary pop cultural figure of Donald Trump. The paper focuses on Trump's appearances in the television series "The Apprentice" and also includes relevant background on Trump himself. The paper then shows how Trump, with his wealth of private property and his interests advanced with the willing aid of the mass media, best exemplifies some of the most prominent and popular qualities of capitalism in both its positive and negative aspects.
From the Paper
"Probably no single individual best personifies the capitalist frame of reference as does billionaire real estate developer Donald Trump. He came into the public light in the 1980s, and became one of the first celebrity businessmen of recent times, working in a field in which most businessmen preferred to keep a low profile and stay out of the public eye as much as possible. The mass media willingly accepted Trump's self-promotions and played him up as the archetypal capitalist and "self-made man." From the standpoint of Marx, a relevant critique would begin by noting that despite the myth of individual achievement contained in this persona, Trump in fact came from a very successful family, his father having already been a multi-millionaire real estate developer in New York City (Slater 44.)"
|
|
|