Piety Is a Part of Justice free essay sample

Individuals are not rigid or stable and certainly not universal. He gives no support to his statement; he simply asserts it, as if it should be obvious. Socrates says that defining piety as, what [ Typhoon is] doing now, is not a sufficient definition because it is simply an example of piety. Something cannot be defined by an example. Typhoon cannot base a definition of piety on his own actions. He commits the fallacy of self-reference; using his own actions as the standard. The standard Typhoon gives, (himself), Is not specific or universal enough for others to use In Judging their own actions.Therefore It falls as a useful standard of piety. Typhoons second definition is that piety is that which is dear to the gods. In other words, actions that are pleasing to the gods are pious, and actions that are displeasing to them are impious. Socrates pretends to be pleased with this definition because Typhoon seems as if he may have finally provided a model with which to measure all pious things. We will write a custom essay sample on Piety Is a Part of Justice or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Typhoon states that actions being pleasing to the gods provides a standard that should enable everyone to recognize what is pious and hat is impious.Socrates reminds him that piety and Impiety are not the same thing, they are opposites. The gods do not seem to agree on much of anything, let alone that which Is Just or good, and certainly that which Is pleasing. So the same thing that Is loved by one of piety. What Is pious of one god may be Impious to another. Typhoons second definition is inherently self- contradictory. Therefore it is certainly not useful as a standard of measuring piety. Typhoons third definition of piety states that, piety is that which is dear to all the gods.In other words, anything that all the gods love, in unanimous agreement, is pious. That which they all collectively hate, is impious. To check the validity of this argument, Socrates then is it pious because they love it? This may simply be circular reasoning. Although Its certainly an interesting question, It fails to supply any qualities that are universally valid. Socrates and Typhoon seem to agree that the gods love piety because It Is pious, not that something Is defined as pious because It Is loved by the gods. However, they both completely fall at defining piety.Not only In this particular argument, but throughout the whole story they fall In this endeavor. The statement that, the pious is loved by the gods because it is pious, never of piety, that it is loved by all of the gods. This statement still fails to supply an unchanging standard with which to measure piety. In conclusion, Socrates appears to long for a perfect, personal and unchanging standard for piety, ( a faultless, unchanging god perhaps), based on a flawless being whose moral standards are perfect and concrete. Unfortunately, both Socrates and Typhoon fail to give any specific instances of either piety or Justice. However, they do deal with the criteria by which such standards could be found. Typhuss argument that piety is a part of Justice, specifically that part concerning the care of the gods, comes closer to satisfying Socrates than all the other arguments. At least this definition uses skillful service as the criteria as opposed to the previous definitions which use Typhoon himself, the emotional, ever-changing gods, and that which all the gods can agree on. We can only answer Socrates primary question, what is piety), once we have a solid, universal standard by which to measure piety.The statement that piety is a part of Justice comes the closest to answering Socrates inquiry because Justice is as close to a universal, unchanging standard that Typhoon ever reaches in this particular dialogue. Justice at least has somewhat of a solid meaning. Although it may differ slightly from society to society and era to era, it is certainly more universal than an individual (Typhoon) or the gods, and what they find pleasing. For our purposes, it is as close to a standard that is ever reached in Deputy

Human Error and Human-Computer Interaction Essay Example

Human Error and Human Human Error and Human-Computer Interaction Essay Human Error and Human-Computer Interaction Essay The context of human error has been considered as one of the most important issues because of its enormous effect in both human and economic aspects. Accordingly, all humans have experienced human error. Errors can be made when people interact with machines and other complex systems. Herein, people have a tendency to do things which are contrary to their expectations and intentions. Depending on the complexness of a certain system and the human intentions that interacts with it, errors can be anything from a discomfort (which are often unnoticeable) to a actual tragedy or calamity. Human error an happen in the plan, design, management, operation as well as maintenance of complex systems characterized by the modern life. Since humans, depend largely and increasingly on these systems to have a better living, it is transparent that human error has a potentialities and has a frequent source of risks to human life and welfare as well as the natural environment (Senders Moray, 1991). Errors in human can result in both human and economic cost. In line with the human factor, errors can result to anxiety, depression, disappointment and stress at work which may result in the inability of the individual to finish their tasks or responsibilities effectively and mat also lead to negative emotions. In terms of the economic aspects, the economic costs largely depend on the error numbers as well as the time spent in the diagnosis of such error and the recovery. Because of these enormous effects, researchers and scholars has spend their time in analyzing and understanding the context of human error. There are various areas or fields in which human can occur, and one of these is the errors in Human-computer interaction (HCI). Primarily, the main goal of this paper is to determine the relations of human error with Human-computer interaction. Part of the discussion of the topic is the definition of human error and the types of human errors. This paper also attempts to provide practical examples of human errors and the future perspectives, reduction and prevention of human error. Pertinent conclusion will also be provided to summarize the findings of this report. For many years, many scholars and researchers has been trying to determine the nature and definition of human error. Human error is regarded as departure from expected, desirable and acceptable practice on the individual part which can result in undesirable and unacceptable results or outcome. Accordingly, human error has played a very crucial role in various large-scale hazardous and life-threatening events and occurrences (Reason, 1990). Some researchers believed that human error might not be an accident because of itself but it might be a result of multiple factors which are not able to control (Reason, 1990). As mentioned earlier, human error can error in various fields from military, politics, economic, computer systems, medical fields, engineering and others. It is said that errors, specifically the human errors are rare occurrences as compared with correct actions or successes. The kinds in which errors can take are restricted and may appear in variety of contexts, but only a few behavioral approaches seems to be accountable for all such errors (Rizzo, Bagnara Visciola, 1987). Nonetheless, comparable types of errors can be seen in perception, speech, problem solving, decision making and actions. However, human errors are less likely to happen tasks are automatic or skilled based such as driving, than when the action call for a rule or process to be considered. It is noted that those actions which call for the utilization of knowledge to solve new issues and conflicts are regarded as the most vulnerable tasks to human errors. The reason for this is because knowledge, like principle, should be translated into correct course of concrete actions, hence, error can be encountered in this translation process (Bogner, 1994). An error has always been attributed to a mismatch of the computer system to human nature and capabilities (Rasmussen, 1987). To illustrate, controversies, technical problem, lost files, or other mistakes in relation to the use of computers are often blamed to either the machine or the human. Errors paved the way to the creation of back up files, for example, and the improvement and innovation of machines to assist humans in working or accomplishing their tasks faster and easier. Human error definition has not only been the subject of the interest of the scholars and researchers but also the types of human error. According to some scholars there are two types of human errors in accordance with the systematic causes of failure. These types of human error include the active errors and latent errors. As Reason (1990) has noted, active errors are errors whose effects are immediately felt. Such errors include syntax error which prevents the efficient compilation or invalid algorithms. On the other hand, Reason (1990) has defined latent errors as errors in which adverse consequences may lie dormant within the system for a long period, and only becomes obvious when such is combined with other factors to hinder the defenses of the system. Aside from Reason, Rasmussen (1982) has also been able to provide other types of human error and these include knowledge based, rule based and skill based human error (see Appendix 1). The taxonomy of human errors is needed when discussing or understanding errors that people encounter with the use of machine. Examples of errors include functionality problems, usability problems, inefficiency, and interaction problems. Functionality Problems Functionality problems refer to the mismatch between the task and the program. This mismatch occurs when ones plan has not been accomplished or one’s goal has not been achieved with the use of particular computer program. Functionality problems are classified according to technical criteria like origin in the process of software development and consequences for the action process (see Appendix 2; Brodbeck et al. , 1992). Usability Problems Although the functionality of a computer program is sufficient for a certain task, errors still occur. They can be caused by a mismatch between user and computer, called mismatch of usability. From an action-theory perspective, mismatches of usability can be differentiated according to steps in the action process and different levels of action regulation. A common hypothesis in action theory is that actions are goal-oriented (Volpert et al. , 1987). Within this approach, the action process comprises goal and plan development, the execution of actions as well as monitoring, and feedback processes (Lewis Norman, 1986). Similar to Hacker (1986), three levels of action regulation are distinguished within the framework of hierarchically organized action plans and goals. There are at least three aspects of the knowledge base for regulation: knowledge of facts, knowledge of procedures, and understanding in the sense of mental models. This knowledge is used to develop goals and plans. Errors arising from usability problems include errors in knowledge, thought, memory, judgment, errors on the level of flexible action patterns habit, omission, recognition, and sensimotor (see Appendix 3. Knowledge errors occur when one is unable to do a task with the computer because one does not know certain commands, function keys, rules, and so forth. Thought errors occur when goals and plans are inadequately developed or when wrong decisions are made in the assignment of plans and subplans although the user knows all the necessary features of the system. Memory errors occur when a certain part of the plan is forgotten and not executed, although the goals and plans were initially correctly specified. Judgment errors appear when one cannot understand or interpret the computer feedback after an input. Errors on the level of flexible action patterns occur when well-known actions are performed. Habit errors imply that a correct action is performed in a wrong situation. Omission errors happen when a person does not execute a well-known subplan. This is most likely when the person is interrupted in an action plan. Recognition errors appear when a well-known message is not noticed or is confused with another one. Finally, sensorimotor errors are placed at the sensorimotor level. There is only one category here because, at this level, it is empirically difficult to differentiate among planning, monitoring, and feedback (see Appendix 4; Brodbeck et al. , 1992). Inefficiency Errors and inefficient behavior have a large conceptual overlap. A detour to reach a goal may be conceptualized as an inefficiency but also as an error, because usually ones goal is to proceed in the most straightforward manner. If there is any differentiation between the two terms, inefficiency could be formally defined as any deviation from an optimal action path (Volpert et al. , 1981). However, this conceptualization has its difficulties: it may be more cost effective, in the psychological sense, to use a strategy that is inefficient in the formal sense because setting up plans and differentiated calculations for them also imply psychological costs (Schonpflug, 1985). Interaction Problems Interaction problems suggest that human error occurs not because of individual problems with the computer, but because of the mismatch between individuals. Although the individuals actions are more or less correct, an error occurs because of an organizational lack of coordination, unclear task allocation, or because of lack of communication between individuals (Brodbeck et al. , 1992).

Reasons for the recent global financial crisis Essay

Reasons for the recent global financial crisis - Essay Example The present article has identified that the cause of the recent financial crisis and economic recessions has been attributed to various factors in the economy. The initial trigger of the financial crisis has been traced to the toxic mortgage backed assets whose decline in value and uncertain duration led to massive losses in the U.S economy. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were both taken over by the US government. Lehman Brothers was declared bankrupt since it could not increase its capitalization. Merrill Lynch was bought by the Bank of America while American International Group (AIG) was rescued by the Federal government through an $ 85 billion capital bailout. Washington Mutual which is currently the largest bank failure was purchased by J P Morgan Chase. The crisis can be traced to the failure of the real estate market due to subprime lending which saw the commercial and residential housing prices increase for a decade from 1990. The Asian financial crisis of 1997-1998 saw the econom ies in Asia generate huge current account surpluses which were invested offshore in economies like US and UK in order to keep the nominal exchange rates low. The US stock prices went high due to the influx of capital. The high growth in economic demands and especially in China saw commodity prices such as minerals, oil and food soar up from late 2004 to late 2007. There are numerous explanations and arguments which have been proposed as the causes of the 2008-2009 financial crisis and the recessions.... The burst of the housing bubble led to massive loan defaults which led to the decline in the values of the mortgage backed securities (Freedman 2010). The subprime mortgages were risky since their true values were hidden in the house price appreciation which allowed mortgage refinancing. The real estate bubble was occasioned partly by easy credit in the economy which was facilitated by expansionary monetary policy of the Federal Reserve where the Fed funds rate was cut from 6.5% in 2000 to 1% percent in 2003 (Freedman 2010). Innovations in the financial system resulted to collateralized debt obligations and other derivatives which fueled the housing bubble. Losses of US subprime mortgages were estimated at $ 250 billion dollars in 2007 while the decline in the stock market capitalization was $ 26,400 billion dollars from the period July 2007 to November 2008. Weak banking regulations and poor risk assessment methods forced coupled with the government regulations which blended the ope rations of mortgage providers and investment banks saw many risky and unqualified customers access the housing mortgages (Freedman 2010). According to the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, the aggregate collateralized debt obligations issuance expanded from USD $ 150 billion in 2004 to US $ 500 billion in 2006 before increasing further to US $ 2 trillion by the end of the year 2007. The value of the Mortgage backed assets held in banks’ books, insurance companies and other major financial institutions explains how the burst of the housing bubble led to massive losses to holders of the mortgage backed securities. However, subprime mortgages had higher interest rates after the initial offer and only 43 percent of the adjustable rate mortgages were subprime