Paternalism Essay Essay Example for Free

Paternalism Essay Essay The debate over state interference in personal liberties has been a reoccurring concern since the beginning of the first types of democracies. In John Stuart Mills, On Liberty, Mill addresses the need for little state intervention in order to respect personal liberty and autonomy. In his essay, Mill stresses the importance of the individual and the need for government not to restrain these liberties through paternalistic means. With his firm stance of his Harm Principle, devotion to utilitarianism, and analysis of liberties of thought and action, Mill confidently stresses that state paternalism is never justified. In this paper, I will argue, through Mills Harm Principle that the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. I will emphasize the idea that one is sovereign and the government need not interfere for liberty consists in doing what one desires, so long as it does not infringe on the liberties of others. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign. Mills defense against paternalism lies primarily on the concept that individuals have a better idea of what is good for them than the government or any one else for that matter. While arguing his case, he ensures that these individuals involved are coherent, educated, and well-informed adults. Before further indulging into Mills argument against paternalism, one may wonder what exactly paternalism is. Websters Dictionary describes paternalism as a policy or practice of treating or governing people in a fatherly manner, especially by providing for their needs without giving them rights or responsibilities. To continue further, paternalism is the interference of a state or an individual against the will of another. This interference is justified by claiming what they did is to protect that person from harm. For example, seat belt laws are a form of paternalism. As of May 1st, 2000 New Jersey statute declared that one must wear a seat belt, whereas if one is not wearing a seat belt they will be summoned. Former Governor Whitman signed the statute into effect based on statistics from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The statistics showed that New Jersey could  save forty-seven lives and have fifteen hundred fewer serious injuries a year. In this case, the government of New Jersey is telling the state that everyone must wear a seat belt. Yet, what about those who ride their vehicle into a body of water and cannot get their set belt off; they may end up drowning and death may arise. In this case, the seat belt law is not helpful. Recently, research in Britain shows that British citizens wear seat belts not because they are told to, but because they fear the damage that may result from a car collision. So, is such a law necessary to tell people what to do? A line needs to be drawn with these sorts of regulations and interferences. People know what is morally wrong and right, and personal liberty decisions need to be left autonomous. Mill, as an anti-paternalist argues interference is wrong. Mill indicates that liberty consists in doing what one desires, and he does not desire to fall into the river. He refers to an incidence where an official sees a person about to cross a bridge which has been declared unsafe. Mill supposes that the official has no time to warn the person of the danger of crossing the bridge. At this point, the person is seized and no real infringements of liberty were asserted on the person. This is where Mill would draw the line of paternalism. In this case, it was necessary for the person to be stopped, if not, he may have been killed unwillfully. So, where does Mill urge that interference is wrongful? Mill supposes that if one knows he is in danger, he ought to be only warned of the danger; not forcibly prevented from exposing himself to it. Therefore, if someone knows the dangers of crossing the bridge, he should be left to make his own decision. I would compare this to the sale of tobacco. As a matter of fact, the danger of smoking is stamped across the side of the box. It states, Quitting smoking now greatly reduces serious risks to your health. Just as someone is left to make his own decision to cross the bridge, as is the decision left to the person to smoke tobacco or not. Yet, if the government were to prohibit tobacco sales, they would be parenting society. Mill urges this not to be done and the decision should be left to oneself. Mill draws a different line of paternalism regarding alcohol in respect to  drunkenness. He thinks that alcohol should not be prohibited, yet if someone is known for acting violent when drunk, he himself should be restricted. At this point, one is infringing anothers liberties and he should be stopped. For example, if a man is know to abuse his wife when drunk, then he should be punished and restricted. On the other hand, John Doe, who goes to the local bar once a week, should not be punished because of another mans abusive tendencies when under the influence of alcohol. Today, this can be compared to drinking and driving. If one is intoxicated while driving, and is in an accident, then he will be severely punished, whereas his license may be suspended and other charges may be pressed against him. Yet, if a sober person is in an accident, he would have minimum reparations to pay, usually an insurance deductible and nothing more. Here, the government is stating they will tolerate drinking, so long as there are no effects on anyone else. The government laid down the law on what is to be done if the privilege of drinking is taken advantage of. It is quite similar to the warning label on cigarettes. Both examples allow people to engage in certain activities, and warnings are given. Everything is left up to the person engaging in the activity. There is limited paternalism, and this is what Mill shows to be acceptable. In On Liberty, Mill does a superb job in demonstrating what paternalism is, and he introduces a solution to the problem. In his bridge example, he lucidly states that there are clear-cut places where one can or cannot step in, especially when the liberties of others are at stake. In summation, if one knows of the consequences of his actions let him be without any interference. Yet, if one is ignorant to what may arise from a given situation one may interfere to protect that person from what he may not want to do. This is where the line should be drawn. Mill does conclude that any state interference would end up granting the state more power against the individual and limit the liberties of man. So, should a paternalistic structure dictate what society can and cannot do? This reoccurring problem is solved in On Liberty, and Mill does suggest that man has the intellectual capability to make personal decisions that are in  his own interest. Paternalistic interference is unnecessary. As Mill argued, The worth of a State is worth of the individuals composing it. Moreover, there are no cases when it is acceptable to force an individual to do something for his own good. His principle will never allow for paternalism. Mills principle dictates the freedom to conduct oneself as he sees fit, so long as all others are left unharmed. As he indicated, which I stand firmly by with my argument, liberty consists in doing what one desires, and [one] does not desire to fall into the river.

Bilingual Education Essay -- essays research papers

Bilingual education was first initiated in 1968. It was a new means to educate the children who spoke a minority language. thirty-one years later the same problems exist for those children who speak a language other then English. The experiment of Bilingual education has been a failure and now it’s time to move on. The first English only initiatives were brought forth in 1981 by newly elected president Reagan. Since then the conflict over Bilingual education has drove on. Currently twenty-three states have â€Å"English Only† laws with 4 states having laws that are pending. The issue of bilingual education and the conflict that surrounds it is primarily focused between whites and Hispanics, although since the mid 70’s it’s also been involved with the Chinese and Mung cultures. Bilingual education has failed however, currently the movement is towards and English only educational system. The simple fact of the matter is that people who speak a language in th is country will never get ahead. We’ve tested the ignorant notion that you could get by without speaking English; or speaking English very minimally, but that’s promoting and even more ignorant idea which is that you don’t need speak English fluently to succeed in America. In 1968 we didn’t know that Bilingual Education wouldn’t work, however, it’s time to move on and do the right thing and switch to English Only.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Lyndon Johnson was president, we had the futile dream of world peace, at the same time we were â€Å"Bombing the North Vietnamese into the stone-age†. In the final year of LBJ’s presidency sever new education initives were taken as part of the last step in his â€Å"Great Society† programs. One of these new initives was Bilingual education. At the time it was supported by the Liberal whites in this country, for the most part the conservative Hispanic sect was opposed to such measures. The idea at the time was, kids would learn in their native language and simply pick up English gradually. Those ideas were radicalized in the 1970’s however, the premise moved away from gradual learning of English; to English wasn’t really necessary. In 1981 Bilingual education came under assault from newly elected president Reagan proposed moving to the English Only system. The idea wasn’t viewed as Anti-Hispanic at the time, or as some kind of racist proposal. Reagan was adored by a majority of th... ...and since 1908 printed exclusively in English by the United States Government. Teddy Roosevelt said in 1908 that â€Å"To print the American Constitution in any other language but English, would be like spitting in the face of our forefathers†. The Untied States Supreme Court has also ruled numerous times that English only laws do not violate the 1st amendment of our Constitution.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  I personally believe that in our nation there needs to be a main language, not 3 or 4 or 1200. George Washington wasn’t giving orders at Valley Forge in Russian he was speaking English. Abe Lincoln didn’t give the Gettysburgh Address in Portuguese. It’s not to much to ask for every American citizen to be able to speak English fluently. No one is forced to live here, and if you refuse to adapt you probably shouldn’t be living here. If you want to speak German by all means go ahead and do so, but do it back in Germany. While you’re in America however, we speak English, and if you don’t know it you’re in trouble. The conflict is over rated. It’s not a matter of racism or of any other kind of hatred. It’s a simple matter of principle. American’s speak English it’s not to much to ask.

Sergei Prokofiev

Ashley Owens Professor Lleweylln Music Appreciation 13 November 2012 Sergei Prokofiev How does music make us feel? Not what do we feel when we listen to music but more specifically, what is it about Music that triggers our human emotions? What effect did hearing those sad country songs on the radio during my morning drive to school have on the rest of my day? Why does upbeat hip hop music always make me nod my head with the beat? Why does a song like â€Å"Go rest high on that mountain† by Vince Gill always make me cry?Music is a large part of most of our everyday lives. Sergei Prokofiev understood that considering the feelings and emotions of the listener was vital in the production of music, and demonstrates in â€Å"Peter and the Wolf† how musical properties can persuade us emotionally. The road to Prokofiev’s growth to being one of the most unique composers of his time started in Sontsovka, Ukraine in the year 1891. His mother was a pianist and his first pian o teacher. Prokofiev began writing piano pieces at age five and by age nine had written his first opera.He studied at the St. Petersburg conservatory starting at ten years of age from 1904 to 1914. Prokofiev performed as a virtuoso starting in 1910 and began making a living in music. At his graduation recital he played his own first concerto. In 1915 during World War I he composed Scythian Suite and his first classical Symphony in 1917 (David Nice). In 1918 Prokofiev moved from Russia to the United States in search for greater artistic perspectives. After mixed experiences he moved to Paris in 1922 and finally returned home to Russia to be with his family in 1936.One of his first compositions upon returning home was Peter and the Wolf. Written in April of 1936, Peter and the Wolf were written as an introduction for children to the orchestra and were narrated by Prokofiev himself at the children’s theatre in Moscow. The story takes place in a meadow near young Peter’s h ouse. After watching the wolf swallow the duck, the young boy devises a plan with help of the bird, to capture the wolf and take him to the zoo. Each particular character in the story is represented by a musical instrument performed in the piece.The bird is played by the flute, high in pitch and quick in tempo. The duck is played by an oboe, slow in tempo and giving him a clumsy feel. The clarinet represents the cat, sneaky and methodical. Grandpa is represented by a bassoon deep in pitch giving him comedic properties. The wolf is played by a French horn which gives off a hominess and dark presence. The hunters are played by the Timpani and drums mimicking the sound of their guns as they try to shoot the wolf. Finally Peter is played by a mix of string instruments, Violin, Viola, String Bass, and Cello.Peter and the wolf show us how musical properties can persuade us emotionally. That we associate certain sounds with being happy or determined like Peter and the string instruments. W hile other sounds can be associated with sadness or generate fear like the wolf and the French horns. It is both the story, the composition of the music, and its ability to attach to parts of the story, that makes Peter and the Wolf so intriguing and timeless. These qualities also make it fun and enjoyable for multi age groups.The story itself quickly has us intently supporting our hero Peter as he is visiting animals in the nearby meadow. It builds a rapport with the core characters making us feel involved in the story, making us care for the bird as he narrowly escapes the clutches of the sly cat, and at the same time casting Peter as the hero in this story. It shows us the down fall of the duck, when he is swallowed by the wolf, pulling us in on the real danger there in the meadow. The climax comes when Peter, with help of the bird, capture the wolf and save the meadows animals from harm.True to his role of the hero Peter then stops the hunters from shooting the wolf and insists that he be taken to the zoo. The story seems to end on a happy note but leaves several questions unanswered and places for the story to continue. Questions like what happened on the way to the zoo, and would the duck ever escape from the belly of the wolf. The story is open-ended and allows us to form our own conclusions. The tune of Peter and the Wolf may be easily recognizable to some, since it is famous for its Disney interpretation and used regularly in classrooms for teaching.Personally I associate the style of orchestra with older cartoons in which a great deal of them were without much dialog and were backed by classical music, as was Looney Tunes – Pigs in a Polka which contained Brahms Hungarian Dances #5,7,6 and 17. It can be easily argued that Prokofiev is indirectly responsible for all of them, as his Peter and the Wolf were really the first of its kind. Over ten years after its original creation, an animated adaption was created by Walt Disney and released on Aug ust 15th 1946 introduced as part of its Make mine Music collection of shorts.Aside from narration by Sterling Holloway the cartoon is true to the original piece in that the characters are represented in sound by their respective musical instruments. The short animation does a great job of lining up the music with the art really bringing the characters and the music together. However trying to make the cartoon more child friendly the story is slightly altered and added to. During the introduction some of the characters are given names, â€Å"Sasha† the bird, â€Å"Sonia† the duck, and â€Å"Ivan† the cat.At the end of the Disney version we find that the duck was not really eaten by the wolf but instead had hid in a tree trunk and is happily reunited with Peter and the other pets once the wolf is captured. Since then Peter and the Wolf has been remade several times in various ways most recently in 2008 by Suzie Templeton. Having the music fit into the animations m akes it very easy for children of all ages to associate the sounds separately and really enjoy the story. Prokofiev’s music was sophisticated that almost a century later we are still using it to teach our children and entertain us all. Prokofiev was one of the great composers of the 20th century; arguably the greatest. I think the case for Prokofiev’s supreme greatness rests upon the likely premise that no other composer of the 20th century enriched the musical repertoire in as many different forms as did Prokofiev, and did so at such a consistently high level of quality and lyrical beauty† (Turlish). Though he is famous for only very few pieces of his work, the power of those pieces remains nearly unparalleled even to this day. Many artist credit Prokofiev for artistic inspiration in their creations.Unfortunately Sergei Prokofiev was in many ways a man out of time. He was product of 19th century music that had his own way of writing and composing. For many who l ived in the era this made him misunderstood and not taken seriously as a composer. In a recent interview, Barbara Nissman said, â€Å"he was such a natural talent, he followed his nose. Nobody ever dictated to him how to write and he wasn’t a member of any school of thought or academic theory. His music went where he thought it was supposed to go. You couldn’t put him in a box. Some people thought he was conservative but others thought he was way too out there.I think his unique approach to the instrument – his sense of originality – frightened a lot of people, especially the critics who had no idea which box to put him in. † Music, even if forgotten or put into the back of our subconscious for a long period of time can often trigger a memory or a feeling we had the first time we had heard it. Maybe an important time in our lives that we lived out while the radio was playing, we may or may not have even known it was there. However at any point we m ay stumble across that song on the radio, waiting in line at the bus station, or shopping at the local grocery store.For however brief a moment it allows us or forces us depending on how you look at it, to go back in time a memory and recall it with enhanced clarity. Sergei Prokofiev realized these things and implemented this epiphany into his music, which to me seems more than obvious in the classic piece Peter and the Wolf. For years to come both children and adults may associate the hominess sound of the French horn with the frightening wolf, they may hear a flute and be over taken by their first memory of watching the classical Disney short, where they were, or who they were with.Through concentrated listening we can learn to separate musical properties of any piece. However attaching those pieces to a character or a feeling is something that Sergei did way before his time. Prokofiev has touched so many lives, and through his music changed the landscape of how we all perceive it . Works Cited Turlish, Bruce. Kith. Org. Web. 18 Oct. 2012. Nice, David. Prokofiev: From Russia to the West, 1891-1935. Columbus. MT. Yale University Press Publication. 18 Oct. 2012. Print Nissman, Barbara. Adventures. In. Music. Biz. Web. 18 Oct. 2012

Italian Verb Conjugations Capire