The Mind Of Great Political Thinkers - 1203 Words

Throughout the semester, this class, political science 260, we have delved into the mind of great political thinkers of history. From Plato to Marx, each political philosopher has given to us their thoughts and ideas, through their works, entrusting us to interpret it and, at the very least, give it a serious thought. All of the philosophers were brilliant in their own since, and each one, no matter how big or small their impact on the world today, is important. Each political philosopher creates their vision and philosophy on the world they see, and each philosopher saw the world in their own light. For that reason, each on, even if we do not think they do, gives us an important look upon the world. I myself have those I favor, and those†¦show more content†¦Secondly, what does the philosopher consider to be justice, and what is the purpose of the political system? Again, in other words, under what way of governing does a society achieve justice, and what is the government of a society meant to do. When arriving upon one’s own political philosophy, these questions must be answered, in order to fully develop that philosophy. As for my own political philosophy, I too, answered these questions to guide myself to my final product. Along the way drawing influence from past philosophers, whom have been discussed in class. To begin with, one must ask themselves about human nature. Like Hobbes, and Mills, I personally find humans to be unequal by nature. Not everyone is born the same in multiple aspects, such as physically, mentally, even socially. For example, I was born vertically challenged (short), not particularly skilled in math, and am socially introverted. Meanwhile, one of my close friends was born taller, is a math major, and is a social butterfly. That is just how it so happens to be by chance. We were both genetically meant to stand at the height we do, we were both born with talents, and whether our social personality is caused by nature o r nurture, we also did not get a choice on the family we were born into to raise us either outgoing or shy. However, like many liberal thinkers, I do believe that politically, we are all born equal, and hold liberties to

Critical Thinking Doesn’t Mean Just Criticizing Free Essays

Sound thinking in every realm of life is more practical than poor thinking. When an individual is skilled in their thinking it pays off by saving time and energy. When an individual uses sound thinking they are able to control life circumstances whether good or bad. We will write a custom essay sample on Critical Thinking Doesn’t Mean Just Criticizing or any similar topic only for you Order Now Halpern, D. (2003) states, â€Å"Critical Thinking is the use of those cognitive skills or strategies that increase the probability of a desirable outcome. † (p. 6). Critical thinking can be also considered as teleological in nature. As well critical thinking concerns the attainment of goals and the desired outcomes from achieving them. Critical thinking is not meant just for criticizing. It is the ability to effectively evaluate evidence and use intellectual tools to avoid being gullible to highly questionable or absurd ideas. The development of critical thinking skills is vital because the skill enables people to operate in a capacity to participate effectively in society, make complex choices, commit to social justice, and reflect on beliefs and actions. Advances in technology have placed an abundance of information at the world’s finger tips. Without critical thinking a person will be unable to separate what is valuable from information that is useless. Critical thinking can be compared to strenuous movement because thinking is hard work. For example at the end of ones day if that person stayed open minded and grasped onto different ideas, that person must now evaluated the evidence supporting those ideas. The National Science Foundation surveyed public attitudes and knowledge about science, they found that 70% of American adults said they were interested in science, but fewer than 30% could give a passable definition of a scientific experiment or hypothesis. Therefore even if a person has general knowledge of critical thinking it will not ensure they will be able to recognize the difference between true and false teaching if they do not have an understanding of what constitutes scientific evidence. With proper instruction a humans thought process can become broadly applied, spontaneously generated, precisely focused, intricately complex and more insightfully divergent. To develop these skills will take practice, concentration and coaching. Critical Thinking must include critical reflection on what passes for critical thinking. However critical thinking can restrict a person to the use of criticism to approved topics and can cause one to wonder into unconventional fields of criticism. Critical thinking is not essentially a negative enterprise but should maintain the kind of criticism which is not aimed at rejection, but considers apparent knowledge on its merits, retaining whatever survives critical scrutiny. Being critical has its positive and negative sides. A writer can compose a review of an article that may or may not agree with the readings presented. The writer’s response to the material will depend on their attitude and what type of approach they are trying to bring out of the material. Therefore critical thinking is not to be taken as simple criticism. In order for a person to be an effective critical thinker they cannot accept information at face value in a non-critical or non-evaluating way. In order for critical thinking to have a positive impact in a person’s life they must have the skills of logical analysis and understand how to apply these skills. According to Passmore (1967), being critical is not simply a habit, a skill, or mastery over the art of logic. Passmore goes on to describe critical thinking as more of a character trait that causes one to ask questions about information received. A critical thinker knows how to consciously apply tactics to discover facts and understanding there meanings. The Stanley Milgram Obedience study successfully shows how a higher authority figure can use their position to encourage others under their authority to perform inhumane acts to cause harm to others. The Milgram study showed that 65% of his subjects which where residents of New Haven, were unknowingly willing to give false electric shocks of 450 volts to protesting victims. These victims were faultless for the pain that was apparently inflicted upon them however because of the authority commanded to the subjects, the subjects whether against or for the experiment continued as commanded. When put in this type of position one must have a strong sense of critical thinking to up hold what it right. This experiment surprises me at how many people will engage in activities knowing they are going cause someone else harm. It makes one wonder how people in authority who use their power to cause others harm gained such a position. One would think that this person’s superior would pick up one such an act and bring it to a stop. Not only that but why would the subordinates allow such activities to continue without reporting the situation to the proper authorities. One can only assume that fear for losing their job or level of respect would cause them to continue to adhere to authority figures whether the action being asked to perform is right or wrong. In the economy we live in today one can only assume to these actions are becoming more prevalent and people are obeying the commands given to the just to keep their careers. No one can afford to lose their job and expect to live comfortable. Instead of using critical thinking to overcome the inhumane request the subordinate just goes along with the order being given to remain in good standing with the authority figure. Had I been the participant in the Milgram study and was ordered to continue with the experiment knowing that the person I was shocking was in total disagreement and begging to stop, I would have stopped. My nature and kind heartedness would not have allowed me to continue with such an act. Not only would I have stopped with the experiment, I would have had to make the experimenter aware that what he was doing is wrong and unjust regardless of the excuse that the experiment was important. The first three questions in the think Tank self-evaluation asks you whether you believe there are right and wrong answers and authorities are those who have the right answers, there are no right answers and everyone has the right to their own opinion, and last even though the world is uncertain, we need to make decisions on what’s right or wrong. These three questions represent the three stages of cognitive development. I found myself to agree strongly with the third statement. I am at the stage in my life where I am well aware that the world is full of uncertainty but we as a society must come together and decide on what is right and what is wrong. This is the main reason we have laws, to keep control of the world. The laws give use a uniformed understanding of how our world is supposed to operate. Without laws we can expect that the world would be in chaos. Even though laws are set in place to be obeyed there are still people who set out to challenge these laws and there are others who don’t care what the law states and do whatever the will to do. However even though the laws are set in place they are not black and white. One must use there critical thinking skills to effectively apply the law in their life. This can be a shortcoming because many laws leave a lot to be interpreted as to the true meaning behind them. With this in mind if critical thinking skills are not applied one may assume they are in the right of the law and really not be because of a lack of understanding. What strengthens me at being in this position in this stage of my life is the fact that I don’t jump to rash decisions. I have learned how to take my time and evaluate each situation, weighing the facts and going with the best option available. Taking the time to do this helps to eliminate a lot of heart ache, struggle and regret. All of us have found ourselves in the position where we wished we could go back in time and change some of the decisions we have made. We all know hindsight is 20/20 and the only thing we can do is live and learn. Learn how to use critical thinking and apply to every aspect of our lives. Working a Hardee’s years ago I was placed in a position to make a decision to cook rotten chicken and serve it to the public. The manager ordered me to cook chicken that both she and I knew could be a danger to the public. Refusing in a very disrespectful manner I lost my job and was sent home with a broken heart because my intentions were good but the situation was handled in the wrong manner. I had to regroup and approach the situation from a different manner; therefore because of my beliefs I knew I could not let the situation go. Instead of remaining mad I used critical thinking to come to the conclusion that people could not suffer from eating rotten chicken and action had to be taken. At this point I called the health department and the district manager of Hardee’s and reported the situation and my concerns. By the end of day I had a call from my manager and was asked to come in for a meeting. During this meeting I was informed by the manager who fired me that if I had handled the situation in a more respectable manner she would have understood my point of view and respected it. If I had taken the time to use critical thinking and explained my standpoint for why I refused to disobey I would have never had to go to such lengths to get my point heard. Because I immediately got angry and viewed my manager as an inhumane person I criticized her and got fired. Although my initial reaction was handled in an inappropriate manner, I was able to bounce back and regain control through critical thinking and informing the appropriate authorities of the facts of the situation and regained my employment. From this I learned that critical thinking and criticism have a domino effect. One bad decision not only causes one side effect, it causes multiply until the chain is broken. In my situation the chain was broken when a thinking critical approach was taken and proper authorizes were involved. I could have been critical of what my manager had done and tried to ruin her name around the small town, but that would have only created more problems. Involving the proper authorities help to bring the situation under control, the chicken was thrown out and no one was placed in harms ways by consuming the product. I regained my employment because I stood up for what was right and changed my attitude towards the situation to gain a positive outcome. Society is often faced with the need to rapidly assess situations and make decisions under dynamic conditions and often with limited information. Sometimes the outcomes are good and sometimes they are bad. As long as humans are involved there will be injury to others in some cases which is unacceptable. Criticism can be constructive or destructive and each individual needs to evaluate themselves on which type they are using along with their critical thinking skills to gain the most positive outcomes for their experiences. How to cite Critical Thinking Doesn’t Mean Just Criticizing, Essay examples

Oxpeckers free essay sample

Oxpecker birds (Buphagus erythrorhynchus), or more commonly known as the â€Å"tick birds†, are both very fascinating, yet confusing little creatures. Well known for being natives of the African continent, the oxpecker bird can be easily separated into two different distinct types of bird species: both the major species and focus species of the study being red-billed oxpecker bird (Buphagus erythrorhynchus) located in northern Africa and the other derived, sister species, being the yellow-billed oxpecker bird (Buphagus africanus) located in southern Africa (Stutterheim et al.  , 2000). These two species of oxpecker birds differ not only in appearance and bill color, but also mating sound, preferences, and their habitat location (Stutterheim et al. , 2000). While both of the oxpecker bird species are known to be very talkative and interesting creatures, these birds are most commonly known for two reasons: 1. ) Their extraordinary and peculiar feeding habits and preferences. 2 . ) Their invasive and unidentifiable relationships with their animal hosts. Both species of the oxpecker bird differ slightly by their feeding habits, but mainly differing on what types of animals they choose to land upon and to be a host for their daily meals (Stutterheim et al. , 2000). The oxpecker bird has caused much conflict when it comes to its true relationships with animal hosts. It has been noticed to have both a mutualistic and parasitic relationships with the host they land upon (Stutterheim et al. , 2000). With further exploration for information on this bird, we are able to determine what type of relationship is truly present in the oxpeckers daily interactions. The oxpecker bird spends most of its typical, normal day flying around and looking for a decently sized ungulate host to land upon or rest upon to begin its normal, everyday feeding process (Stutterheim et al. , 2000). Once the host animal has been located and the bird has landed, the oxpecker bird begins to remove and feast upon the invading ticks that are lingering on or are attached to the ungulates large body (Weeks, 2000). The oxpecker birds will continue to remove the invading ticks with their bill until there are no longer any ticks present on the animal host (Weeks, 2000). If any nearby or oncoming predator is coming to attack the animal host and is sensed or noticed by the resting, feeding oxpecker bird, it immediately reacts to the predator’s presence and begins to fly away from its host (Plantan, 2009). This sudden motion of the oxpecker bird ultimately sends a warning message to the unsuspecting ungulate host to either run away or to protect itself from the predator that is approaching (Plantan, 2009). This specific type of relationship is commonly known as mutualism. Mutualism is where both species benefits from the interaction with one another and neither are harmed in the process (Nunn et al. , 2011). In this case, the birds are being well fed while the animal host is rid of ticks and is able to avoid oncoming danger (Nunn et al. , 2011). But the oxpecker bird is not always seen or known as the friendly, helpful companion it normally appears to be. While removing the invading ticks from ungulates body seems to be the oxpecker birds only job in life, the oxpecker bird will sometimes discard the removed ticks as its primary meal choice completely (Weeks, 2000) Instead, the oxpecker bird will use its bill to begin to pick apart and start eat the raw flesh remaining of the poor, unsuspecting ungulate it is currently resting and feeding upon (Weeks, 2000). If no previously made wounds from invading tick removal can be found lingering on the animal’s body for the bird to feast upon, the oxpecker bird will use its bill and immediately begin to peck open and create fresh wounds on the body so they can start or continue on with their feeding process (Bishop and Bishop, 2014). This type of relationship is more commonly known as parasitism. Parasitism is where only one species benefits from the interaction while the other gains nothing in return and is harmed (Nunn et al. , 2011). In this case, the oxpecker bird is being well fed while the animal host is just experiencing pain (Nunn et al., 2011). These two interesting and different types of interactions can cause major confusion and conflict as to what type of relationship, parasitic or mutualistic, these oxpecker birds truly have with these ungulates hosts. Researchers have tried for many years to broaden their knowledge about this confusing and peculiar little bird. By monitoring a nd recording the daily lives and interactions of the oxpecker species and their hosts, experiments were able to be created and executed to discover what the oxpecker bird prefers as their primary meal source and whether or not it helps the animal hosts in the end. Ultimately, these multiple experiments and observations will allow information on these birds to be pieced together and lead to discovery of whether the oxpecker and the ungulate hosts are considered to have a mutualistic relationship or a parasitic relationship. To dig deeper into this relationship mystery, individual experiments that were performed in different locations and that were executed in a different kind of way can be observed closer. Each of the experiments can hold information and conclusions for either a parasitic or mutualistic relationship. The final results can then be compared to similar works to see if this information holds true for other experiments and if conclusions are similar in any way. If so, the collected information can either debunk or verify what conclusions are wrong and right. This will overall provide what type of relationship, or relationships the oxpecker actually has with its animal host. In order to do this, each type of relationship separately must be looked at separately and more viable information must be found on each that can either prove or disprove the experiments final outcomes. The first experiment that was further evaluated was preformed back in 2004 at a local zoo located in northern Switzerland. This experiment will be a main focus, considering it shows perfect examples of both the parasitic and mutualistic types of oxpecker bird relationships. In this experiment, multiple rhinoceroses were placed in captivity and were relocated in two separate habitats within the zoo with a few oxpecker birds residing in each of the two separate habitats (McElligott et al. , 2004). In one of the habitats, the captive rhinoceroses were completely exposed to invading ticks and all of the other outside insects and factors (McElligott et al. , 2004). The other habitat holding the other captive rhinoceroses in the study, however, were treated and cleaned of ticks or oncoming pests daily before they came in any contact with the oxpecker birds (McElligott et al. , 2004). The daily lives and interactions of all the rhinoceros, their responses to the oxpecker bird’s presence and their overall tick abundance in each of the habitats were observed and recorded daily over a twenty-one day period (McElligott et al, 2004). Knowing that oxpeckers feed primarily on ticks and other pestering insects, it would be assumed that the oxpecker bird would completely clean the infested rhinoceros of all of its natural pests and predators. However, this predicted outcome was not always the case for the tick infested rhinoceroses habitat. For most of this study, the oxpecker birds would use its bill to pick off and eat only the tick that were located on and removed from the ungulate host (McElligott et al. , 2004). But almost halfway through the study, the oxpeckers feeding preference outcome had begun to change for the worst (McElligott et al. , 2004). The oxpecker birds would not only eat the ticks that they had been removing, but they also began to pick at the fresh, bleeding wounds that were left behind after the tick had been removed (McElligott et al. , 2004). The oxpecker bird’s newfound thirst for the host animals blood may be due to the fact that the tick meals are normally filled with the host animal’s blood before they are removed and eaten (Plantan, 2009). Therefore, the oxpecker birds acquired a taste for the animal’s blood through the tick and learned that they could obtain it by pecking and eating flesh straight from the animal’s body just as the ticks do (Plantan, 2009). These new open wounds, however, are not good for the host animal’s health. The wounds are left open to potential diseases and other pathogenic outside factors that may ultimately be deathly to the animal host (McElligott et al. , 2004). Therefore, this information and these results lead closer to the idea of a parasitic relationship because the oxpeckers are being fed and nurtured while the rhinoceros are only being eaten alive. In comparison to this portion of the experiment, another similar experiment was done to measure overall tick abundance with the absence of the oxpecker birds. Ticks were collected daily from the bodies of a herd of cattle in a field located in Zimbabwe (Weeks, 2000). The number of ticks that were collected from the cattle and the number of wounds the ticks had created were counted and recorded daily over a time span of one month (Weeks, 2000). The researchers then compared the absent oxpecker collected data to the data of the cattle that had been exposed to oxpecker birds (Weeks, 2000). The data of the cattle exposed to the oxpecker birds showed major differences to the oxpecker free cattle (Weeks, 2000). The results of both parts of the experiment showed that there was no real significance in the number of invading ticks that were removed from the cattle, but there was a big difference between the number of wounds that were left in the cattle body (Weeks, 2000). This showed that the oxpeckers were not really focused on eating the ticks, but more interested in the blood of the cattle and therefore hurting it in the end (Weeks, 2000). The first experiment with rhinoceros shows both a mutualistic side and a parasitic side to the oxpecker bird. In the presence of invading ticks, the oxpecker birds would eat the ticks as a primary meal but still began to create new wounds on the animal after a short period of time. This turned the oxpecker bird and rhinoceros’s relationship from being somewhat mutualistic to purely parasitic. In the second experiment comparison with the cattle, however, it was strictly a parasitic relationship between the two species. The cattle experiment debunks the empty conclusions that were missing from the rhinoceros experiment. This information shows that oxpecker birds really do not really have a preference for ticks as primary meals. The oxpecker birds prefer and feed mostly on the flesh and blood of animals they are using as their host. This type of interaction between the two is not only harmful to the current animal host, but also can prove to be very dangerous and deadly as well when it comes to the overall health of the animal host. In order to enhance and push closer towards the idea of a parasitic relationship, a single oxpecker bird was put into captivity within a habitat with an ungulate and was monitored to see if they ate mainly ticks or flesh of the ungulate host (Milius, 2000). The number of ticks that were removed and consumed by the oxpeckers and wounds that were fed upon and created were measured, recorded and monitored daily over a period of one month (Milius, 2000). Observations and recordings showed that invading ticks on the animal host body were chosen as a primary meal by the oxpecker birds 70% less then flesh or wounds of the animals were chosen (Milius, 2000). This shows that flesh was preferred more as a primary food source than the invading ticks. This information leads more towards a parasitic relationship between the oxpeckers and their hosts. In the case of the cleansed rhinoceros habitat in the previously explained experiment, the outcome and overall conclusions were not that much different in results from the tick infested rhinoceros habitat (McElligott et al. , 2004). Since there were no invading ticks or other pestering insects available for the oxpecker birds to remove or feast upon from the host, they needed to find a new, viable food source to eat daily in order to survive (McElligott et al. , 2004). The oxpecker birds would land upon the ungulates backs and since there were no invading ticks or flesh wounds currently present, they would begin to create new or fresh ones with their bill in order to begin their feeding process (McElligott et al. , 2004). The bird would peck and pull at the rhinoceros skin with their bill until they exposed tissue or caused blood to appear (McElligott et al. , 2004). The oxpecker birds would then feast upon whatever they had created or could get a hold of (McElligott et al. , 2004). The rhinoceros would try multiple times to shake the oxpeckers off of their bodies (McElligott et al. , 2004). This technique, however, did not always prove to be helpful or useful for the animal host (McElligott et al. , 2004). The oxpecker birds would fly away from the animal’s body for a short time, but would then return once the shaking had subsided (McElligott et al. , 2004). In a similar experiment, the same technique was used but impala were used as the host animal instead of rhinoceroses (Mooring and Mundy, 2000). Oxpeckers were free to land upon the clean, captive impala as they pleased, and both the impala responses to this oxpecker bird’s presence and oxpeckers actions were recorded over a period of time (Mooring and Mundy, 2000). The impala hosts did not mind the presence of the pestering oxpecker birds at first and would mostly just ignore their overall existence and intrusion as a whole (Mooring and Mundy, 2000). Without the presence of invading ticks as a primary meal, the oxpecker birds were forced to pick at old, scarred wounds (Mooring and Mundy, 2000). The oxpecker birds would then eat the flesh and blood of the impala host and would begin to create unnecessary new wounds on their skin if no previous ones were found (Mooring and Mundy, 2000). The impala host did not agree to this kind of behavior and started to viciously shake their bodies in order to try and remove the pestering oxpecker birds (Mooring and Mundy, 2000). The oxpecker birds, however, would not let this attempt to shake them send them away (Mooring and Mundy, 2000). Eventually, the oxpeckers would return within minutes after the impalas shaking subsided (Mooring and Mundy, 2000). These few experiments showed that when the ticks were no longer a factor for a primary meal source, the oxpecker birds immediately went for the blood and flesh of theircurrent animal hosts. These experiments only portrayed a parasitic relationship between the two since the rhinoceros and impalas were only being harmed by the oxpecker birds and were not benefiting from them at all (Mooring and Mundy, 2000) (McElligott et al. , 2004). This suggests that the oxpecker birds may prefer to eat flesh in place of ticks because it is more appealing and appetizing to them. Both the rhinocero s and impala animal hosts did not tolerate the oxpecker bird’s invading behavior and tried constantly to shake the oxpeckers off or fight back, but they ultimately failed. It shows that the animals did not want the oxpeckers to invade them and supports the idea of a parasitic relationship even more. In order to further enhance and verify the conclusions of all the experiments with parasitic outcomes, oxpecker birds should be placed in different cages with ticks and a piece of raw meat or animal flesh as primary meal choices. The oxpecker birds can then be studied and observed daily to determine what meal the oxpecker bird prefers to primarily eat over a period of time. This will determine if the oxpecker bird enjoys ticks for dinner or if they are truly blood driven creatures. An experiment was done similar to this explanation to further prove that the oxpeckers wanted flesh and blood of host animals instead of ticks for meal source. Oxpecker birds were captured and were then separated into three different types of cages; one cage containing just a piece of flesh from a dead animal, one containing just ticks, and another containing both sources of food (Plantan et al. , 2009). The animals were given fresh, replacement food each day and their preference was recorded daily over a period of time (Plantan et al. , 2009). In the first cage with both of the feeding preferences present, the animal host flesh was almost always preferred as the oxpecker birds primary food source while little to almost no ticks were feasted upon in the cage (Plantan et al. , 2009). The second cage with only animal host flesh present as a food source was almost always close to being all gone or was completely eaten by the end of the day (Plantan et al. , 2009). The third cage that contained only ticks for a food source were eaten scarcely by the oxpecker birds, mainly because that was the only food source present for the oxpecker to feast upon (Plantan et al., 2009). The results of this experiment show that the oxpecker birds preferred host animal flesh over ticks. Therefore, this shows that when the oxpecker birds land upon the animal hosts, they are not looking for invading ticks to feast upon (Plantan et al. , 2009). Instead, the birds are looking for wound in order to feed upon the animal’s flesh and blood. Regar dless of all the biting and pestering done by the oxpecker birds in each of the experiments presented, the oxpecker birds also proved to be sometimes helpful and beneficial to their animal hosts when it came to the experiment referring to the rhinoceros habitats. While removing invading ticks did not always seem like a positive interaction because of the flesh and wound eating that occurred after the tick was removed, there were also some positive results due to removing them from the rhinoceros body (McElligott et al. , 2004). The removing the ticks did stop most of the spread of diseases brought upon from the ticks from entering, overtaking and evidently killing the rhinoceros host that was being invaded by the tick (McElligott et al. , 2004). The survivability of the rhinoceros host also increased drastically when any potential diseases were no longer a health risk (McElligott et al., 2004). This suggested that the oxpeckers were actually helping the rhinoceros in some way, therefore giving evidence of a mutualistic relationship (McElligott et al. , 2004). To test if this is a true observation, another piece of work focusing on invading tick disease in wildlife was thoroughly examined to see if tick removal is truly beneficial to animal ho sts (Bengis et al. , 2002). In this particular experiment, a large group of livestock was isolated into two different sections of a field (Bengis et al. , 2002). One group of livestock was exposed to ticks and other pestering insects (Bengis et al. , 2002). The other group of livestock was clear of ticks and other potential pests daily (Bengis et al. , 2002). The livestock group without any tick or pest exposure was shown to have a 47% higher survivability rate than the livestock that was exposed any type of ticks (Bengis et al. , 2002). Any of the livestock that died during the course of the experiment were examined thoroughly to determine the cause of death (Bengis et al. , 2002). The test results of the deceased livestock showed that the animal had been bitten by an infected tick that most likely transmitted the malignant disease over a period of time to the unsuspecting livestock host, which evidently killed the animal overall (Bengis et al. , 2002). Overall, these results showed that removing ticks would benefit the animal hosts by removing the infection before it began to spread (Bengis et al. , 2002). This information gives insight on the mutualistic relationships between oxpecker birds and their host animals. The invading ticks however, were not the only substances that were being pecked at and removed from the rhinoceros hosts body and hair by the oxpecker birds (McElligott et al. , 2004). These oxpecker birds were also noted and observed removing and eating other types of pestering insects, such as flies, lice and fleas, from the rhinoceros hosts body and hair (McElligott et al. , 2004). The oxpecker birds were also sometimes seen feeding upon and picking at the loose dandruff and dry, dead skin that was present all over rhinoceros hosts body and hair (McElligott et al. , 2004). The oxpecker birds were also sometimes observed removing, and discarding the compacted ear wax that was forming in the rhinoceros hosts ears (McElligott et al. , 2004). These other bodily removals by the oxpecker birds were overall helpful and beneficial to the rhinoceros hosts health and appearance, rather than causing more harm or damage to the rhinoceros (McElligott et al. , 2004). This proved to be a sign of a mutualistic relationship between the two since the oxpecker bird is not only being fed and the rhinoceros host is also being cleaned as well (McElligott et al. , 2004). In a similar experiment, oxpecker birds were observed not only removing but also eating the earwax and dandruff off of other animal hosts such as giraffes, elephants, deer, zebras, etc. (Dickman, 1992). The earwax and dandruff from the animal host’s body provided protein to the oxpecker birds, benefitting their overall health and development (Dickman, 1992). The animal hosts benefit in two separate ways from this interaction with the oxpeckers (Dickman, 1992). The animal host’s ears are cleared of all of the earwax, meaning that they can detect and hear upcoming predators more easily than with their blocked ears (Dickman, 1992). Also, the dandruff removal from the animal hosts hair and body helps prevent rashes or other irritations from developing on the animal hosts skin (Dickman, 1992). This type of removal and eating habit benefits both the animal host and the pest (the oxpecker bird) of the interaction (Dickman, 1992). Therefore, this experiment gives evidence of a possible mutualistic relationship between the two parties. In summary, all of the experiments presented for this topic represented one or both of the parasitic and mutualistic relationships of  oxpeckers birds and their ungulate hosts. Each paper represented either a similar or an alternative experiment to other experiments. Their results either gave further support to or rejected the conclusions of the experiment all together. Both types of the oxpecker bird’s relationships were thoroughly investigated and proper examples of each type of relationship were provided. After many experiments and sometimes contrary results, it has been co ncluded that the oxpeckers have more a parasitic relationship with their ungulate hosts than a mutualistic relationship. Many of the experiments presented for this topic showed the oxpecker birds in a state where they were only harming there animal host and not giving them any benefit at all (McElligott et al. , 2004). The oxpecker birds, however, should not be seen as only harmful creatures. Even though they seem to do more harm than good, they also tend to help their animal hosts with predators, spread of infection, and other overall health benefits (Bengis et al. , 2002) (McElligott et al. , 2004). This type of research on oxpecker birds is very important for future studies as well. It is suggested that the oxpecker bird is currently on the verge of going extinct (Mellanby et al. , 2009). If the oxpecker bird is truly going extinct, it is suggested to be a positive thing to the ungulates since the oxpeckers will no longer be invaded and attacked by these animals (Mellanby et al. , 2009). Their extinction, however, can also prove to be very dangerous as well. While it would prevent animal hosts from being practically eaten alive, the overall health of these animal hosts will be in jeopardy because the oxpeckers will not be able to warn hosts of predators or stop the spread of infection (Mellanby et al.  , 2009). The oxpeckers birds may be considered a parasite, but it does not mean that these birds are not needed in the environment. These birds help in more ways than are known and they should not be seen as just a threat to their hosts. Their extinction should be monitored more carefully so this species does not disappear altogether. Without this species, it is unknown what may truly happen to the animals that the oxpecker birds interact with on a daily basis. The oxpeckers should always be given the benefit of the doubt because we never know what may arise if this creature just disappeared one day.

Crime In The Netherlands Essays - Wijchen, Batenburg, Cult, Sect

Crime In The Netherlands Over the years, there has been much discussion regarding the relationship between crime and religious sects. How were crime justified? Where and how were the robberies committed? In the article Crime in the Netherlands in the sixteenth century Janzma studies the issue of robbery in relation to the Appelman-Batenburg group and the followers of Johan Willems by exploring the socioeconomic and political conditions responsible for their survival. According to the author, the Appelman-Batenburg sect was more organized than most since they had organized a criminal network of spies, locksmiths and goldsmiths. This would ensure that the loot would be well hidden and new operations could be planned. Secondly, their raids were carried out in secrecy. Since they were scattered, this allowed the group to disperse over a greater surface area. According to the author, this was a wise move, since it allowed the members to continue to steal while learning of the fate of other leaders which had been caught. On the other hand, the Johan Willem sect were more concentrated in the area around Wetzel, Guelders and Overijssel. This group comprised mostly of people who had been members of the Appelman-Batenburg group as well as those who had escaped the siege of M?nster.Unlike the Appelman-Batenburg sect, the John Willem group stole mostly from churches however did also steal from houses and monasteries. However, like the Appelman-Batenburg, they did carry out their raids in secrecy. In addition, the author also discussed the theme of violence. Although violence was rarely used during the raids, it was not uncommon for members to kill their victims or even other members to avoid being recognized. In addition, the author adds that for the Appelman-Batenburg sect, murder was also used as a ploy to not rouse the suspicion in the neighbourhood in which they robbed. The main difference between these two groups is seen in the way in which justification to commit these acts were perceived. For the Appelman-Batenburg, robbery was seen only as a temporary act. According to the author, once the town had been seized, they used it as a base from which the sinful world could be punished. They held the view that the church property belonged to them. The author adds that since the Appelman-Batenburg sect was being persecuted and killed by monks, they used robbery as a form of vengeance against the church as well as the Eucharist as well as to persuade unconvinced members to set aside their objections. On the other hand, the author states that Johan Willems group viewed themselves as God's people. They believed that a new kingdom was to be established by God with the aid of Johan Willems and that the practise of robbery and plundering would come to an end once the kingdom was founded. A final theme discussed by the author was survival of the groups. According to the author, there were two main reasons why the groups managed to survive : geography and recruitment. Since both sects were scattered, there were more possibilities to hide from the authorities. As well, the war rendered certain areas unsafe which allowed the groups to expand in more geographical areas. Recruitment for both sects contributed greatly to their survival because of the war and religious developments. According to the author, many new recruits were peasants and citizens who were dispossessed and held for ransom who would not hesitate to join them as a form of survival. In conclusion, the theme of crime in the Netherlands is a very vast one and difficult to fully understand without conducting a more thorough study of the socioeconomic and political conditions of the times as well as the study of other groups. This article serves as a introduction to the subject at hand and offers the readers the possibility of further study. As well, the article teaches us about the vulnerability of humans and their quest for survival in times of desperation. To end, could these movements have served as a background for today's society? History

Marin Luther King essays

Marin Luther King essays Martin Luther King Jnr. was born on 15 January 1929. His father, Daddy King, was the pastor at the Ebenezer Baptist Church. King took his duties beyond serving his church, and was involved with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. This was probably the influential thing in kings (jnr.) early life that later made him accomplish what he did. King first met racism at the age of six, when a white friends father said that they could no longer play together because King was coloured. His own parents explained about slavery and also made an important point: Dont let it make you feel you are not as good as white people. Kings progress through school was fast. At 15 he went to Morehouse College, a theological college in Connecticut. Here, he expressed doubt about the value of religion, but was eventually convinced of its relevance to the civil-rights struggle. At 19 he was ordained. With a degree in sociology he went to Crozer Theological Seminary in Chester, Pennsylvania, to study for a degree in divinity He came top of his class and graduated in 1951. He went on to study for a doctorate in systematic theology at Boston University. After completing his studies, King felt that he should return home. Accompanied by his new wife, Coretta, he began work at Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery Alabama. The church was attended mainly by the educated black middle class. Once installed, he set about organizing his congregation. His interest in the community and his effective oratory made him a popular and respected figure. Montgomery, in the Southern heartland, had strict segregation laws; for example, rules about what black passengers could and could not do on buses. Resentment at these rules ran high. On 1 December 1955, Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat to a white and was taken to jail. On 5 December the local black ministers met to discuss...

The Pilgrims and Their Life at Plymouth Colony Term Paper

The Pilgrims and Their Life at Plymouth Colony - Term Paper Example Economic and social life†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦..†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦..†¦..5 3. Conclusion †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.†¦..5 4. References †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦..†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦..6 Introduction Pilgrims are people who go on a journey regularly with oral or religious goal to a certain alien land. English Puritan Separatists created Plymouth colony, which is the original settlement of Puritan, in 1620. The Pilgrims moved from England in search for religious liberty or better livelihood. According to legends, the pilgrim arrived at Plymouth Rock, but their history does not indicate this landmark. Discussion Inhabitants started erecting structures and rough buildings for the winter season. The initial years at Plymouth colony were not easy for the pilgrims. Poverty, insufficient food, strenuous job and unpredictable weather conditions made pilgrims prone to diseases. Therefore, harsh climatic conditions and illness became a challenge to them. Towards the termination of the colder season, about half of the pilgrims were no more. Life with Indian settlers Similarly, the colonists met Samoset, an Indian who amazed them with his English, learned from the Maine coast traders. Samoset presented Massasoit to colony inhabitants, Wampanoag an Indian leader, who entered into a peace agreement with the pilgrims. Similarly, Squanto played and guidance and interpretation roles, and through his assistance, the colonists acquired corn planting, fishing and fruit gathering skills. The pilgrims welcomed the people from India to commemor ate their initial field production, presently marked as day of giving thanks. When Massasoit died, the Wampanoag joined an ethnic coalition to eliminate English settlers, but the prevailing war of King Phillip nearly eliminated the Wampanoag, (Deetz & Deetz, 2000). The colony slowly expanded, and the former Plymouth plantation Settlement extended because settlers constructed houses in the location. Plymouth colony maintained its sovereignty for more than seventy years, and in 1962, its population increased to more than seven thousand people. It was incorporated with the Organization Bay of Massachusetts to create the regal colony. Politics and government The Pilgrims obtained the lawful authority to live at the colony guided by the modern England Council in 1622. Bradford obtained the Warwick right of 1930s; the patent gave him the southern territory in Cohasset and Bay of Narragansett. Based on the patent, he could control of the whole colony, but collaborated with other settler to manage the land. After some time, surveyors established boundaries in the area joining the modern Bristol Plymouth colony and Barnstable colony as the Plymouth colony. The colony’s freemen entered into the Compact mayflower; where they together with other newly selected freemen, met at some time to discuss the colony challenges. The General Court body appointed the governor and his subordinate, made laws and imposed taxes. The leaders of pilgrims were not sure of their legal status since they inhabited the location illegally. They additionally realized they would require some disciples. Therefore, to settle the challenge, forty-one leaders met, formed and signed the mayflower Compact, the initial contract for American internal government, (Harness, 2006). The

Is science the only way to discover and describe human behavior Essay

Is science the only way to discover and describe human behavior - Essay Example Intuition appears to emerge mostly from unconscious roots (Ward, 2008). Scientists, like Sigmund Freud, tried to explain the origin and nature of intuition. But the capacity of the human mind is too profound, and goes beyond any grasp of reason. In fact, the mind, and thus human behavior, is greatly related to the Divine, or the spirit. Spirit penetrates reality (Ward, 2008). Even so, intuition in people is an ability to have visions or feelings that cannot be explained by science or rigid rationality. My behavior, personally, is at times governed by my intuition. There are times, for instance, that I feel a sense of danger or threat about something that I immediately turn away. There is one particular experience I had which confirmed my belief that intuition is not something that science can explain. When I was 22 years old, while I was at a park waiting for a friend, a boy approached me and asked for some money. He said that he had not eaten for days. But a sudden feeling of threat washed over me and I so I told the child that I have no extra money to give to him. And then out of the blue an idea came into my mind: in order to help him I must bring him to a social service agency. I told the boy that I will bring him to a place where there are people who can take care of him. The boy willingly followed me. When we reached the agency, the boy suddenly cried and thanked me. And then the big revelation came: the boy told us that he was taken by a group of men three days earlier, whi le he was playing in a public playground. These men told him to ask money from people. But because of me, the boy happily said that he can now go home. Because of this experience, I decided to ask a psychologist. She told me that what happened to me may not be intuition at all, but an outcome of prior knowledge. She told me that I may have heard, read, or knew about a syndicate that takes children, and that my decision to take the child to a social service agency was influenced by