End of the novel Essay Example for Free

End of the novel Essay This is similar to Victors pursuit for glory, as both men (Victor and Walton) are putting the life of themselves and other men in danger by continuing to try and achieve their ambition. From Victors above words we can see that he is still motivated to seek revenge on the monster, despite the danger to his life. He also attempts to put the life of others in danger, as he asks Walton to murder the monster if he gets a chance:  If I do (die), swear to me, Walton, that (the monster) shall not escape; that you seek him, and satisfy my vengeance in his death.   (Volume 3, Chapter 7, p212) When Victor enters the novel, he is portrayed as a noble and kind person who is capable of both love and friendship. He has strong ambition and eager to learn. However, one gets the impression that when he starts to create life, he is trying to take the role of God, and becomes obsessed with gaining glory and power so much, that he forgets the importance of love and family. Victor also fails to care for the monster, which in my opinion is highly monstrous as it just like abandoning a new born baby. Furthermore, Victor acts selfishly in many occasions throughout the play. He decides to create a female companion for the monster, to stop the monster chasing him. But he goes against his promise when he thinks about what the world will think of him, if a race of monsters attacks the world. Everything Victor does is centred on himself and he only thinks about what benefit it would be to himself, when he considers an action. Now that I have considered Victor as a character, I will now examine the monster. The monster starts off his life as an innocent creature; however his abnormal figure and demented shape caused people to be scared of him and reject him. When the monster walked into an old mans home to obtain food and shelter, the old man:  -turned on hearing a noise; and, perceiving (the monster), shrieked loudly, and, quitting the hut, ran across the fields.  (Volume 2, Chapter 3, p108) All the man had to see was monsters figure to make him run away without any enquiry. This suggests that the creatures look posed a threat to everyone who saw him, and led to him being alienated from society.  However the monster is quite kind to start off with. While he was observing the De Lacy family, he demonstrates his kind gestures by gathering a great pile of wood for the De Lacy family to use as firewood. He also put their well being before his starvation, as he stopped stealing a part of their store for (his) own consumption when he found out that it inflicted pain on the cottagers. During the beginning period the monster spends with the De Lacy family, he perceives that the words they spoke sometimes produced pleasure or pain, smiles or sadness, in the minds and countenances of the hearers. He too wanted to be able to interact in this way and ardently desired to become acquainted with speech. This shows that the monster is eager to learn and wants to become just like other humans. Once the monster has mastered the use of speech, his desire to be like humans motivated him to enter the house of the De Lacy family, and speak to the blind old man when he was left alone at the cottage. This shows that the monster has some wit and cleverness as he selects a person who cant judge him by his figure, but his personality and speech. However, whilst he is talking to the blind old man, the rest of the De Lacy family return home and were shocked by the appearance of the monster to such an extent that Felix, a male member of the De Lacy family, beat the monster violently with a stick using supernatural force. It is this mistreatment of the monster that sparks a deadly hatred within himself for his creator. The monster had received abuse from the De Lacy family after he had helped them, all because of the way that Victor had made him look, and the fact that he had failed to protect him. It is this anger that makes the monster monstrous by personality and drives him to kill William (Victors younger brother):  Frankenstein! You belong then to my enemyto him towards whom I have sworn eternal revenge; you shall be my first victim.  (Volume 2, Chapter 8, p144) The monster also seems to be jealous of Victor, as he knows that he can never have love and relationship like him and other humans because of the way he looks. We know this because the monster frames Justine for murder of William, as he knew he could never possess anything as beautiful as her. And it is this feeling that brings the monster to demand Victor to make a creature of another sex, but as hideous as himself. From this, we can see all that the monster wants is a bit of love and companionship, to make him lead a life which is similar to humans. However Victor cheats the monster by first agreeing to create the female monster, but then tearing (her) to pieces in front the monster at the final stages of her production. This upsets the monster as Victor has effectively destroyed the monsters only chance of love in front of his eyes. This antagonism caused the monster to become monstrous once again, as he murders both Henry Clerval and Elizabeth (now Victors wife): -what I now held in my arms had ceased to be the Elizabeth whom I had loved and cherished. The murderous mark of the fiends grasp was on her neck, and the breath had ceased to issue from her lips. (Volume 3, Chapter 6, p199)  Despite this, the monster does illustrate some humane characteristics towards the end of the novel. He presents great grievance for the death of Victor, and heartfelt remorse for his malicious actions:  Oh, Frankenstein! generous and self-devoted being! What does it avail that I now ask thee to pardon me? I, who irretrievably destroyed thee by destroying all thou lovedst.

Public Housing Policy in the USA

Public Housing Policy in the USA Public Housing Public housing, introduced at federal level in 1937, provides for low-cost housing through public financing by means of publicly owned and managed multi-family developments. Several cities began providing public housing prior to the 1937 Housing Act, through local programs of their own. Furthermore, it was these kinds of local programs that helped mold the model for the federal program. Public Housing was environed to be a solution for homelessness, but due to several problems with residents and owners it was not as successful as planned. Although there are multiple themes and topics related to public housing and its poor success this paper will solely focus on 6 themes that are critical in understanding the history and advancement of public housing. These themes are in regards to the population it was aimed for, financing, federal public housing authority, local public housing authorities, design, and urban renewal. Public housing did not originally aim to provide housing for the â€Å"extreme† lower-class, it was actually aimed towards select members of the working class. More specifically, public housing’s original design intended to serve the needs of the industrial middle class, who were temporarily unemployed or lacked adequate employment during the Great Depression.[1] After the Second World War concluded, many individuals and members of the working class were able to purchase their own homes by utilizing low-interest mortgages via Federal Housing Administration (FHA). However, discriminatory practices took place through these benefits. In their study, sociologists Douglas S. Massey and Nancy A. Denton, demonstrate the discriminatory nature of these practices. These benefits were targeted, for the most part, towards non-Hispanic whites and consequently helped move non-Hispanic whites into the suburbs, while simultaneously keeping blacks.[2] Although Massey and Denton’s study focus on the segregation of blacks other minority groups were also affected and segregated as well. Regardless of what minority group an individual belonged to, public housings were segregated and the higher end ones were mainly exclusive to whites while the lower end ones were mainly exclusive to minorities. Public housing has also been viewed and portrayed as a solution for homelessness. According to urban planner Peter Marcuse’s study, many planners, architects and social workers had a more moralistic view because they believed that adequate housing was a necessity in order to improve the quality of life for slum dwellers. Furthermore, they viewed public housing as means of aiding the state in fulfilling its responsibility to ensure that decent and affordable housing was available for everyone in the United Sates. Early examples of unequal housing were the terrible conditions of the tenements where many immigrants lived, which inclusively disgusted many early reformers. As previously mentioned, minority groups lived in terrible public housing and in order to put an end to this the early reformers initiated demolition of the poor conditioned tenements, they also got rid of the design of interior rooms containing no windows, lastly they also bettered air circulation and added more lighting to public housing. The main issue with the terrible qualities of these tenants was that they led to dangerous and unsanitary living conditions. Within time, however, housing commissions were set up in many major cities in order to improve the quality of public houses by imposing regulations on landlords.[3] Landlords were therefore now being held responsible with providing adequate living conditions for all residents regardless of ethnicity and immigration status, which was consequently a major improvement in comparison to the previous lack of regulations and treatment of minority based public housing. In 1937, after a long struggle in Congress, the first national housing legislation passed. In addition to providing low-cost housing, the housing legislation also improved the deteriorating economy by providing construction jobs. Public housing was never actually thought of as being a long-term or permanent home for the poor. The actual purpose of the act was â€Å"to alleviate present and recurring unemployment and to remedy the unsafe and insanitary housing conditions and the acute shortage of decent, safe and sanitary dwellings for families of low income†[4] A modification was actually made to the original legislation in order to be accepted by congress which was the addition of â€Å"alleviation of unemployment† as of the main purposes of the act. This housing meant to house low-income families, which congress defined as, families who could not afford to build adequate supply of decent, safe, and sanitary residences.[5] The 1937 National Housing Legislation essentia lly intended to alleviate public housing of unsafe and insanitary living conditions. Tenant screening received support from advocates of public housing because they believed that in order to for housing developments to be successful, residents needed to be employed. According to Marcuse, when public housing was first constructed, qualitative tenant screening was the norm. But, by the 1950’s and earlier, very strict tenant policies became enforced. These strict tenant policies included that large fines for property damage were imposed and unwed pregnant women could be evicted. Other criteria included that families were required to possess two parents, the head of the household needed to be employed, and families needed to have some record of good housekeeping skills. Visits were inclusively made to future tenants’ previous homes in order to see if they were suitable candidates. Occasionally checking up on public housing developments to make sure the units were being adequately taken cared of, was another common practice.[6] The Federal Housing Authority developed several policies and programs as a response to difficulties with congress and to cope with presidential administrations. Problems with congress began with the first housing act, because it funded fewer units than it was designed to. According to law and real estate expert Michael Schill, the act only funded capital costs and expected rental income to cover most of the operational and maintenance costs.[7] Congress however wrongfully blamed rising costs in public housing to poor management. The real reason for rising costs were actually due to old buildings needing to be refurbished, high inflation, and increasing expenses. High inflation took place mainly due to tenant incomes declining. Financial problems also escalated with a small affluence of public housing construction between 1969 and 1970. The need to fund construction and other physical needs to public houses had a negative economic impact on residents, especially during that time becau se they’re income was significantly lower than usual. Public housing authorities were consequently left with a nearly impossible choice of raising rents, decreasing services and maintenance, or doing both. In January of 1973, the Nixon administration sanctioned a freeze on most federal housing programs. However, according to R. Allen Hays, Nixon and his advisors later viewed public housing as a tried and true program which is why the freeze was shortly lifted and Section 8 was created. Section 8 intended to replace both low and moderate income subsidy programs, ultimately it was intended to avoid too much exclusion of people of very low incomes and too much density of very low income individuals. The impact of section 8 was not a successful one because it was the low-point of subsidized housing production for the entire decade. It was not until Carter administration’s that subsidized housing construction rose. Although Carter had many unsuccessful initiatives, public housing was an obvious exception because during his administration housing programs reached high levels of production.[8] One dispute in favor of public housing was that it couldn’t be entirely removed becaus e of humanitarian and social cost reasons. Not even Congress could bring itself to completely abolish public housing. Public housing was crucial in not only providing housing for people in legitimate need but it also proved to be economically beneficially because it meant less vagrants and also created a greater circulation of wealth. However, in means of being economically beneficially, it was not as successful as it was in providing housing. This was in fact one of the only things public housing was successful in, because it suffered from many other problems. Furthermore, Local Public Housing Authorities also suffered due to rising rents and reduction of services. This took place during the 1960s and it displeased many tenants which created a series of rent strikes, which eventually concluded with the Brooke Amendment being added to the 1969 Housing Act. [9] In 1971 the Brooke Amendment provided operating subsidies to housing authorities to pay for losses and deficits and also capped public housing rents at 25% of the household’s income. Also, in order to qualify for admission, tenants’ incomes were required to be less than 80% of the area’s median income. Low-performing housing authorities continued to struggle, because their neglect led to the need of many repairs and modernization being needed. These housing authorities delayed maintenance needs and did not adequately fund modernization. Also low percentage of the rent going wards operation costs had a negative impact of public housing. Lastly, the solution of the housing authorities was a poor and greedy one because instead of increasing the percentage they increased the rent, which only led to the continuation of maintenance problems and buildings rapidly perishing. Beginning around the early 2000’s, the majority of the federal housing dollars began to be used for tenant-based housing vouchers, known as â€Å"Housing Choice Vouchers.† The way it works is the recipient pays 30% of their income towards rent and the voucher covers any difference there may be between what they paid and the rental price of the unit. According to Carole Walker and David Varady’s study, these vouchers have failed to satisfy the need of the public to have affordable housing.[10] One of the reasons why these vouchers have had little success is because individuals with vouchers have difficulty finding a public house because landlords prefer to rent to unsubsidized families because they can charge them higher rents. Poor design of developments is another problem that many public housing residents faced. Many public houses had no ventilation and windows in their interior rooms, which made meant that these public houses had rooms filled with unsanitary air. There was also a poor amount of light, which signified that man of these rooms were very dark in the sense that they had no windows, proper air flow, and adequate lighting. These houses resembled mental institutions more than houses. Families could therefore not thrive in in that environment because it was a very neglected and gloomy environment.[11] By the early 1940’s, high-rises was seen as a solution to provide an adequate living environment for tenants and also as a way to provide a better image for public houses. High rise buildings was glorified due to providing more spacing, but economically they were not as glorified because they were not exactly the cheapest form of public housing developments. High rises were more expensive in the long run than any other development because they provided much more units which meant much more operational and maintenance costs. They were also much more expensive and difficult to build which is why in some cases architects were unable to properly execute their original architectural/design plans.[12] Due to cost reasons and in order to encourage residents to better themselves, limits on unit amenities were enforced. One way which limits on unities were made due to cost reasons was how several services were no longer provided and how poor quality units were produced. Interestingly enough, Congress and housing authorities blamed tenants for the terrible conditions of the units when in reality it was mostly their own fault. Many of the services no longer provided were reliable elevators and some of the poor units produced had inadequate floor space.[13] This led to several security problems, which is why many housing authorities put the blame on the tenants, but in reality they were the source of the problem. Many public housing developments were also designed to be separated from the rest of the neighborhood/community. An example of this is how at times zoning policies placed buildings diagonally into the pattern of the street. A break in the street grid was also implemented in order to separate the public housing development from the rest of the neighborhood.[14] Due to its peculiar institutional look, many developments have become easily to identify visually, which has led to it being subjected to stigmatization and isolation. This is why its massive structure has been negatively critiqued. All these negative results were by no means intended or anticipated, it was a complete shock to housing authorities and architects, because the result it was supposed to produce was a benefit to residents. Residents were supposed to benefit from the design because they would be able to distinguish their residences from the rest of the neighborhood and be viewed as a symbolic building, but its separa tion from the community actually led to backlash. This was also only a logical result because if tenants are separated from the community they are not allowed to coexist with everyone else and provide a better image of themselves. By being isolated they only provoke a negative image of not wanting to be part of the community. Initially Site selection was completely under local control. However, this was a problem because local authorities carried on discriminatory site selection. Racial segregation was one of the practices they carried on in which a larger amount and the better quality ones were designated for whites over blacks and any other minority group. Local housing authorities also separated each racial into their own developments, i.e. some only housed blacks, some only housed whites, some only housed Mexicans, and some only housed Chinese.[15] A clearer example is the William Houses project in Brooklyn, New York which was exclusive to whites, and no other ethnic group was allowed to reside there. Another example is the Harlem River Houses project in Manhattan, which was built exclusively for blacks. This project was also built as a way to silence the demands made by the African-American community in New York for access to public housing. Urban renewal initiated in 1949 with Title I of the Housing Act, but proved to be problematic because it made it possible for large-scale slum clearance to take place without requiring that all cleared housing be replaced.[16] Law expert, Lawrence M. Friedman, emphasized in his study the dangerous aspects of slum housing and how it was crucial that it be illegalized in order to avoid further unsanitary living conditions which could spread not only among the slum housings but among greater society as well.[17] Actions would begin to take place with laws, however some of these laws were not effective. Title I for example did not mandate construction of low-income housing. Living conditions of the poor was largely disregarded due to the fact that it did not concern most of the population, since most of the U.S. population was middle-class. However, unsanitary living conditions could affect the greater population through the spread of diseases. This was one of the reasons why actions wer e taken towards slum clearance but unfortunately they were not effective and irrational. Gans documented a horrible example of urban renewal, a slum clearance project that took place in the West End of Boston, with little support from the neighborhood residents.[18] This was especially shocking because it signified the removal of a community that appeared to be perfectly functional. What was additionally more irrational was how the renewal process would be quite lengthy and would leave large unproductive areas in the center of the city. Although actions were being made in order to clear slum housing, the process was slow and irrational. The 1949 Housing Act ordered for 810,000 units of public housing to be constructed. However, by December of 1951 only 84,600 units of public housing were actually under construction. This led to the creation of the 1954 Housing Act, which mandated that public housing be built solely in areas of urban renewal/slum clearance. Therefore, new public housing no longer increased housing supply, instead it replaced deteriorating housing. Furthermore, slum dwellers faced the problem of displacement because they had to wait for the new promised public housing to be fully functional. That is why investment in urban renewal increased, because of the decline of public housing construction.[19] To conclude, public housing was originally designed in order to provide housing for all low-income individuals and families, but as time went on the infamous question of the deserving poor was brought up and low-income individuals and families had to fit into certain regulations in order to be allowed to live in public housing. Public housing also faced many financial difficulties at the federal level due to difficulties with congress and presidential administrations. Financial problems were also present at a local level and were reflected with poor housing authorities and rising rents and reduction of services. The actual design of these public housings also proved to be problematic, and its most problematic feature were perhaps the segregation among them and the violence that arose from some of these. Overall, public housing failed to be as successful as originally environed, because in practice they suffered from overcrowdings, racial tensions, violence, poor management, and finan cial problems. Bibliography Bickford, Adam, and Douglas S Massey. Segregation in the Second Ghetto: Racial and Ethnic  Segregation in American Public Housing, 1977. Social Forces. 69, no. 4. 1991. Friedman, Lawrence M. Government and Slum Housing: Some General Considerations. Law  and Contemporary Problems. 32, no. 2. 1967. Hays, R. Allen. The Federal Government and Urban Housing Ideology and Change in Public  Policy. 2nd ed. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995. Gans, Herbert J. The High-rise Fallacy. Design Quarterly. 24. 1992. Gans, Herbert J. The urban villagers; group and class in the life of Italian-Americans.. New  York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1962. Marcuse, Peter. The Myth of the Benevolent State: Towards a Theory of Housing. New York:  Columbia University, Graduate School of Architecture and Planning, 1978. Milbert, Isabelle. Slums, Slum Dwellers and Multilevel Governance. The European Journal of  Development Research. 18, no. 2. 2006. Public Housing. Social Service Review. 11, no. 1. 1937. Schach, Janice Cervelli. Planning and Design of Public Housing an Evolution of Structure.  Landscape and Urban Planning. 39, no. 2. 1997. Schill, Michael. Distressed Public Housing: Where Do We Go from Here? 60 University of  Chicago Law Review 497. 1993. The United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, and provisions of other laws and of  executive orders pertaining to the United States housing act of 1937, as amended. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of the Interior, U.S. Housing Authority, 1938. Walker, Carole, and David Varady. Housing Vouchers and Residential Mobility. Journal of  Planning Literature, 18.1 2003. [1] Bauman, John. Public housing, race, and renewal: urban planning in Philadelphia, 1920-1974. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1987. [2] Massey, Douglas S., and Nancy A. Denton. American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of an Underclass. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1993. [3] Marcuse, Peter. The Myth of the Benevolent State: Towards a Theory of Housing. New York: Columbia University, Graduate School of Architecture and Planning, 1978. 248-263. [4] The United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, and provisions of other laws and of executive orders pertaining to the United States housing act of 1937, as amended. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of the Interior, U.S. Housing Authority, 1938. [5] Ibid. [6] Marcuse, Peter. The Myth of the Benevolent State: Towards a Theory of Housing. [7] Schill, Michael. Distressed Public Housing: Where Do We Go from Here? 60 University of Chicago Law Review 497. 1993. [8] Hays, R. Allen. The Federal Government and Urban Housing Ideology and Change in Public Policy. 2nd ed. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995. [9] Ibid. [10] Walker,Carole, and David Varady. Housing Vouchers and Residential Mobility. Journal of Planning Literature, 18.1 2003. [11] Schach,Janice Cervelli. Planning and Design of Public Housing an Evolution of Structure. Landscape and Urban Planning. 39, no. 2. 1997. [12] Gans,Herbert J. The High-rise Fallacy. Design Quarterly. 24. 1992. [13] Schach,Janice Cervelli. Planning and Design of Public Housing an Evolution of Structure. 1997. [14] Ibid. [15] Bickford,Adam, and Douglas S Massey. Segregation in the Second Ghetto: Racial and Ethnic Segregation in American Public Housing, 1977. Social Forces. 69, no. 4. 1991. [16] Public Housing. Social Service Review. 11, no. 1. 1937. [17] Friedman,Lawrence M. Government and Slum Housing: Some General Considerations. Law and Contemporary Problems. 32, no. 2. 1967. [18] Gans, Herbert J. The urban villagers; group and class in the life of Italian-Americans.. New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1962. [19] Milbert,Isabelle. Slums, Slum Dwellers and Multilevel Governance. The European Journal of Development Research. 18, no. 2. 2006.

Contemporary Theories of Crime

Contemporary Theories of Crime According to the history and development of the criminological theory, the knowledge of crime theory has a tendency to include the past criminological theory that has been developed before. For example the labeling theory has a great influence from Chicago school, Durkheim theory and concepts, and symbolic interactionism (Plummer) Theory has the particularity of being the subject of constant renewal, like most of the knowledge in our society. One way of expressing this characteristic is by Thomas Kuhn in his book: structure of scientific revolutions. What he express in his theory is how the knowledge considered as â€Å"normal science†, is in a continuum spiral, according to how theory explains reality inside the framework of paradigms. Once these paradigms reach a point in which they cannot explain reality, normal science reach the point of a crisis. To explain this crisis the paradigms of the normal science must change, summarizing what is usable by the anterior normal scien ce and adding the new knowledge in form of paradigms that explains reality (Kuhn). This is exactly what happens with criminological theory, but still, besides all the progress theory has done, crime is still something hard to attach to a whole theory, and the combination of theory perspectives seems to be the most viable way to express the phenomenon of crime. On the contemporary criminological theory, one the perspectives that has a good approach to the actual context of crime is labeling theory. The labeling theory refers to the attachment of labels to a specific person in society according to the role he has on it. For example someone who commits a crime is recognized by the group of people around him as a criminal. But is not only the person who commits a crime, someone who is accused of committing a crime, doesn’t necessarily have committed that crime, but still he gets the label. Labeling theory refers to the identity that other people confer to one person. This identity is expressed as a label. The labels are stigmas inside society[1] that people must carry. This leads to the other part of the theory. Labeling theory, besides confer a stigma to the members of a society, also tries to explain another aspect of criminological behavior by opening the possibility of change in criminal behavior[2]. The stigma is hard to remove, but this theory proposes a way of reintegrating the members considered abnormal[3]: shaming is the process in which the person submit himself to a treatment or circumstance in which he resigns socially to crime, allowing him to reintegrate to society as a normal subject. The support of this theory is that bring an enormous quantity of material observation in other aspects of society, providing and using the concepts that society uses to determine the subjects inside it. For example the use of labels that are not only related to crime. Another contemporary theory with a wide perspective and more accurately related to actual crime is the environmental theory. This theory has a very situational approach to crime, because it is based on the characteristics that a special place must have for crime to be something executed. Crime occurs within the intersection of a space, time, a motivated offender, an attractive target, and lack of guardianship (Francis T. Cullen). The approach of this situational context has also the inclusion into theory of the daily activities of society, demarking the situation and the possibility of decrease crime by nullifying the situations in which crime can be committed, according to the routine people has. This theory has an opening to set crime as something different from the theories used before the 60’s. The possibility of seeing crime as something that may happen in every context, changes the relations of a stigmatized person to a situational expression of crime. Crime becomes the main subject of study, not the context[4] or the person who commit crime. When in this theory it is said that the focus is on crime, still a lot of concepts and ideas are part of the theory. For instance, the influences of Chicago school of mapping and characterizing crime zones. One contemporary expression of the applications of this theory is the broken windows theory[5]. The third analyzed theory in this text is the Developmental theory. This theory proposes the approach on how crime is explained by the whole history of one subject, group, and society. Crime is attached to every life expression that has happened since birth. Having a research of the main aspects of one person’s life, the individual expression and social values get mixed as the theoretical approach explains crime. This mixture of social and individual behavior is what allows this theory to be one of the most wider and contemporary (Paris). This theory is most applied to young people[6] and it takes into account the perception of the people who commits crime and the people who are victims of a crime. As other contemporary theories, there is possibility of change in the criminological behavior, allowing the criminal to be a normal individual. Some authors explain three ways in which this theory is applied to specific situations. The first one is the continuity of behavior in life course. The second one is that life course behavior might change or continue during time and on its characteristics. And the third one is that the life course behavior continues and changes. This theory is a multiple perspective to analyze crime, by studying the things to take into account to set an idea of how crime develops inside society by the life course of individuals, making a reciprocal analysis of the individuality and collectivity. All together These three theories provide a wide range of analysis, if the three of them are put together there are a lot of factor that would be covered by these theories. Still is not like just mixing the three theories. Each theory has a valid point and perspective to take into account. For example, the developmental theory takes into account the life course, which is an abstraction of the material and real life of the people. It is really a manifestation of the influence of all the material aspects under the mirror of time. This approach is quite accurate to study specific phenomenon because the analysis is deeper in context and it show the influences of society altogether with the individual tendencies. The approach of this theory at certain ages is what restrains this theory to be used. Because of its focuses on age, their analysis perspective loses weight when it is tried to be used in studying different groups, and in the theory itself. This loss of weight is because one of the main cores of this theory is the social development related to biological development. One of the tendencies of these three theories is to provide an option to explain how crime can be changed. Proposing a solution, like the shaming theory[7], or proposing new safety procedures to secure the environment. All these three theories keep the opportunity of becoming a normal[8] citizen or member of a society. Still, besides of the solutions proposed, the praxis of a theory can be very different from what the expectations are. One of the characteristics of these theories, is that are short in context matters. This means that theoretical explanations are only based as maximum to a nation level[9], provoking that many of the structural and contextual representations in politics, economics, culture, education, etc., in the world, cannot be part of the theoretical analysis. But still these representations have their manifestations even in small communities. This is impossible to not take into account macro-tendencies, but it is possible just to focus in micro-tendencies, even if this does not explain a complete context. Labeling theory, as the developmental theory, is not a completely sentence of explanation, but the analysis perspective that is valuable of this perspective is precisely the idea of a label. With the consent or without it, people always make judgments and make labels to identify other people, and to be identified among society as an individual. What criminological theory does is to focus on the labels related to crime. This is a much attached way in which theory explains reality with constructions of reality from society. One of the characteristics of this theory is also that label is just a value granted for the people participant in society, and because of that, according to the social capital[10] and possibilities of change that people have, they might change their label at will. Another fact of this theory, but no so attached to social reality is one of the manifestations of this theory, because of the idea of shaming, not because is not possible, but because is sometimes a motor to commit more crimes in certain contexts. The environmental theory has the possibility of treating crime as a situation with a specific context and circumstances that must be accomplish for the crime to be committed. The focus on the crime as a main subject allows this theory to be the bond for the combination of the other three theories, increasing the possibility of explanation and praxis that these theory have in total. These theoretical perspectives allow taking into account the elements of developmental theory, and use them together in the same explanations or theory. Of course in this conjunction of works, the aspects that restrain developmental theory must not be taken into account. The same goes for the labeling theory. Environmental theory has the possibility of being the connection between the individual perspective of crime in labeling and developmental theory, but at the same time it takes into account the idea of generality prescribed in both. Together with the perspective that environmental theory uses of situational context, crime becomes a definition with a lot of defined perspectives. Using the idea of label and the identity factor to set inside society, and as a representation to the outside society, the idea of crime explains one side of the individual behavior, by the representation that people has during a certain act. The environmental theory explains the event expressed as crime according to the material context in which people lives, but also making reference to another expression of behavioral crime conduct. Using some perspectives of the developmental theory, the factor explained before is part of a whole construction of life, providing a deeply analysis of a crime event, circumstance, conduct, behavior, context, social representation, and manifestation. Contexts and explanations The idea of the scientific revolutions explained at the beginning of the text, is to express one of the situation in which crime theory can be expressed more attached to explain reality. In case of the criminological theories, the perspectives are as many as a bunch. In the whole package of theories, the time has played a main role to develop each theory as the knowledge in crime situations and circumstances becomes wider. But there is a moment, and had happened before, that theory needs a new view and perspective. The citations and influences of the theories in the XIX are immersed in the theories of the XX, and now the contemporary theories are making improvements to explain by new paradigms the new circumstances that involve crime in our society. This, according to Kuhn’s idea, is the traditional process of making the scientific revolution. That is why is importance to pose a new circumstance that provokes a crisis in the criminological theory. Using these three theories may provide a great angle of perspective to analyze a concrete situation. But still the theories are short when it comes to practice. For example: the Mexican context. At first sight is a country like any other, but their main economic and political relations are with United States. The country has a first sight corruption; the police[11] are one of the main actors in these situations and are colluding with the narco[12]. The country is subject of constant violence, but the government is unable to solve the situation, because of the illegal trades and agreements that had surpassed the government power politically and economically. This is at macro-scale, but a micro-scale is almost the same, with the addition that is the poor people who gets involved in this violent context to have something to eat every day. So, how can these three theories make an approach to the context of Mexico? Evidently the crime is on one of the highest rates of Mexican history nowadays. But what is the work of the criminological theory when the established law steps aside and leaves the path to the everyday survival law? Criminological theory must be applied to the context in which it must[13]  be an explanation that requires a reaction from people. Criminological theory as it is right now, does not have the possibility of explaining the events that are happening in the world like Islamic State, Mexico’s violence, Ukraine war, and more. Criminological theory is being insufficient for the fast and changing environment in the world. The implications are every time wide in economy, politics, culture, etc. Using the actual theories to explain crime[14] may explain some aspects of reality, but recovering just the important aspects of each theory does not lead to a complete explanation and possibility of chang e of the real context. Being transdisciplinary is one of the new paradigms that criminological theory can use. Not closing the explanations of the criminal world to just the criminal theory. The possible revolution that criminology as a theoretical science can have is to be at the time of the context. References: Francis T. Cullen, Robert Agnew, Pamela Wilcox. Criminological theory: past to present. New York: Oxford university press, 2007. Kuhn, Thomas. Estructura de las recoluciones cientificas. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Economica, 2006. Paris, Jessica. Environmental criminolgy and crime prevention. n.d. http://legacy.usfsm.edu/academics/cas/capstone/2010-2011/criminology/paris-environmental criminology intel led policing.pdf?from=404. 29 09 2014. Plummer, Ken. Labeling theory. University of Essex, United Kingdom, 29 09 2014. http://www.sjsu.edu/people/james.lee/courses/soci152/s1/ajreading10labeling.pdf . 27 09 2014. [1] According to the criminological theory, this is focused on crime. [2] This is an implication that this theory has when is applied to explain crime. The results vary, because of personal behavior, situations, and social strains. Even, instead of reducing crime, these implications can even increase it. [3] Those who are consider criminals. [4] This does not mean that context is not taken into account. [5] The maintaining and safety control of urban environments may be a big influence to stop crimes. [6] There is a graphic that represents the main ages in which crime occur that set the age of 10 as the beginning and 20 when the young people stop committing crime. [7] Emphasize on social punishment to provoke shame. It focuses on the behavior on the offender. [8] According to the establishments of what normal is, and also if crime is considered as something abnormal. [9] Contextually, this is a big spectrum, but the political tendencies, economics, society and culture, in which crime is a subject of constant representation, are bigger than the idea of a nation. [10] Explained deeply in â€Å"Two concepts of social capital: Bourdieu vs. Putnam† By Martti Siisiasen, Department of Philosophy, Trinity College, Dublin Ireland. From: http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.istr.org/resource/resmgr/working_papers_dublin/siisiainen.pdf [11] The public force that most stop the crime and apprehend the offenders. [12] Production and commerce of drugs, and traffic of people. [13] The using of this word emphasizes a moral reaction against crime. This must be included as a factor that may change according to the context. [14] Under the look of a moral conception of good and evil.

Essay --

1. Why is it important to be able to test theories according to Popper (Falsification thesis)? Please explain your answers. According to Popper, it is important because every real test of a theory should be an attempt to falsify it, or prove it to be incorrect, because if it is not proven wrong, it becomes not scientific. A good theory is one that can indeed be disproven, or â€Å"testability is falsifiability.† 2. What is positivism and why is it important in advancing knowledge according to Comte? Positivism is the studying and recording of social life based on observations. Positivism is important in advancing knowledge due to the idea that this newly observed and obtained information can be used to reform society. 3. According to Comte what is the difference between social statistics and social dynamics? According to Comte, ‘social statistics’ focus on how order is maintained within a society, while ‘social dynamics’ focus on how a society changes over time. 4. What are the laws of three stages and how does he explain civilizational development? First Stage: ‘Theological’ or ‘fictitious’ stage. Second Stage: ‘Metaphysical’ stage. Third Stage: ‘Scientific’ or ‘positive’ stage. Comte explains that these stages evolve and develop from one another beginning from the belief from gods, to many gods and priests, then to the rejection of deities in favor of scientific thinking and rationality. These stages are needed for humanity to properly evolve. 5. In the documentary on Voodoo in Benin, what civilizational stage would August Comte define the society of Benin; in its citizen’s approach and understanding of the impact of Voodoo on everyday life? Why? In the documentary, the society of Benin would fall into the ‘theological’ stage. ... ...ion to quality of life in the modern world? Please explain. People can forget their personal lives and solely exist to work and make money rather than enjoying a life beyond that of the bureaucracy. A bureaucracy will focus only on a set of goals that must be met in order to maintain a value driven society. This rationalization can create an almost robotic-like society that truly forgets about the simple pleasures in life, which are also important in maintaining a cohesive and happy community. 20. What was the main argument in Weber's Protestant Ethic? The main argument is that the foundation of capitalism came about from the principles of Calvinism. The Calvinists believed in predetermination and that God would provide substantial money if you were deemed to have it in this life. They also were hard working, saved their money, and even reinvested their capital.

The Emergence of the Middle Ages: 1000 ad Essay -- essays research pap

The Emergence of the Middle Ages: 1000 AD When the Old World Order began to crumble with the fall of the Roman Empire and the break up of the Mediterranean the foundation was laid for a new type of civilization to emerge, a â€Å"western civilization†. The Empire in the East continued, based in Constantinople.. It was the most obvious heir to the culture of the classical world. This culture still dominates Eastern Europe and Russia, through Orthodoxy. Islam was the religion of Arab townsmen. Led by Mohammad (d. c. 640, Hijira 622). They swept out of the Arabian Peninsula. [Lacey, 174] They eventually took control of all North Africa, Egypt, Anatolia (under the Turks) and for a time Spain. Islam is also is an heir to Classical civilization. It gleamed mathematics from Mesopotamia, Philosophy from the Greeks and Monotheism from the Jews. For almost a thousand years Muslims were by all objective standards more advanced than Western Europe Finally, Barbarians and Germanic tribes dominated what was left in the area known today as; France, Spain, Italy, Britain, Germany. This was the least developed of the three cultures that succeeded the classical world. It was dominated increasingly also by the Church of Rome. It was a Latin reading and speaking world, therefore the term "Latin Christendom." This area was to become the West. From around 600 to 1000 AD conditions were fairly bleak in the emergence of a western civilization. By 1050 AD the Latin Christendom movement ...

Beer and Man Brewing Company Essay

Mountain Man Brewing Company was established in 1925, and since then has come to be known as â€Å"West Virginia’s Beer†. In 2005, despite a 2% drop in annual sales they sold approximately 520,000 barrels and reported revenue close to $50,000,000. Mountain Man Brewing Company’s average consumer is male, above the age of 45 and typically in the middle-to-lower income bracket. With a small number of Mountain Man Brewing Company’s consumers making up a large percent of their sales, it is important for the company to appeal to that small number of consumers, and ensure they are satisfaction to their brand loyal. Competition: Recently, the state of West Virginia repealed the arcane law; allowing retail stores to sell beer at discount prices. This creates pressure on old school regional breweries, like Mountain Man Brewery Company, to try and compete with the â€Å"top-dogs† of the industry. Future of the Beer Industry: As beer sales are not largely affected by economic downturns, Sales are however, affected by change in consumer (taste) demand. Current demand: In 2005 light beer accounted for over 50% of total beer sales; putting pressure on Mountain Man Brewery to introduce a light beer line into the market ( or make some other change), in order to remain profitable. Financial Assumptions 1) Mountain Man Brewing Company will only be able to achieve .15% of the light beer industry market share. 2) Mountain Man Brewing Company will spend $1,500,000 on advertising their new light beer in their first year. 3) In association with producing a light beer, Mountain Man Brewing Company will have an additional $69,000 in fixed expenses per year. 4) Mountain Man Brewing Company will be able to sell their light beer at $0.29 per bottle. 5) Mountain Man Light will not erode sales of Mountain Man Lager anytime in the near future. 6) All else will be help comparable to the current capital structure of Mountain Man Brewing Company.

Starbucks Weakness

Starbucks, as we all know, are one of the globally popular companies, but like everything else, it has its own weaknesses. Here I will suggest some solutions to help solve the problems faced in their inventory management processes. Starbucks follows the EOQ model, which involves heavy calculations and predictions. Without the formulas and some basic information about the demands from customers, the cost of placing orders, and other variables, the calculation of the EOQ model will not be able to reach its optimal potential. From this, collecting the accurate information for the calculations is vital, the company has to acquire reliable and timely sources. Conveying surveys, searching data online from sources like Google Analytics about the spending behavior, and carrying out research are among the ways to collect vital info from current and potential customers. By doing this, it can help determine the annual demand of the company, which can help solve or at least ease on the uncertainties of demand. Having skilled or experienced employees/ staff is also crucial as they are considered by some are the most valuable assets of a company, which they experience customer feedback firsthand. These ‘customer feedback’ are useful to further improve the customer of said company. Listening to employee feedbacks can also help to execute certain operations, selling products to customers, and how to do things better (Vos 2013, p. 1). Other than that, having good employees that takes charge of the calculation, for example the calculation of the EOQ model, are vital because they are needed to calculate the best possible figures of ordering. Through this, it can help narrow down the EOQ model predictions. Also, they can help predict through experience without completely relying on the calculations. Calculation based on the EOQ model also requires constant set of data. For example, the demand for the year has to be known (which has been covered on the second paragraph on accurate data collection), the cost of ordering has to be same throughout the year and also the lead time must not fluctuate and remains consistent. Having a good supplier can help solve the consistency of ordering cost and also constant lead time (Ready Ratios, 2013). A good supplier will be able to achieve expected results, offering good quality of products and delivering goods on time are among some of the benefits of having a good supplier. Building a good relationship with the supplier will get you more benefits, such as priority as a valued customer, competitiveness (in terms of pricing, quality, reliability ahead of the competition, in this case, Starbucks, is facing), innovation and also product development (Bob Reiss, 2010). Other than that, having good material handling can also help cope with the unpredictable usages or the uncertainties of demand. By having good material handling, the company can improve the efficiency of the production this will save time and indirectly save labor cost as productions run faster. It can also maximize space utilization by storing materials in the way it should, it also can reduce cost by saving on inventory carrying cost which is not properly handled. All of this are necessary to make sure if something goes wrong in the calculation, the loss can hopefully be covered by the savings in material handling, making the loss easier to swallow. Having good transport of goods is also beneficial by having shorter lead time and at the same time transporting more goods are both time and cost saving. Furthermore, keeping a contingency plan at the ready can also help the company in case of unpredictable situations happening, such as natural disasters, shortage of raw materials usually hits us by surprise. So, to keep the company on their toes, to be ready to face emergencies such as this, the company can either keep additional safety stocks, or have another backup supplier from another region to provide with the supplies just to counter the sudden changes and to prevent stock outs to happen. Other than that, the appropriate application of the contingency plan can showcase how the company can utilize and prove to others that the company can manage themselves well, inviting more investors to join in the company. Moreover, advancement of technology plays a part in the inventory management of Starbucks. They can use it to keep track of their inventory much faster and efficient. This allows them to keep track and keep updated with how many units they have. With this said, they can improve their inventory flow and also quickly order materials that are needed for fear that miscalculation happens in the EOQ model which leads to surplus or shortage of materials, with the help of inventory management system (IMS) that Starbucks uses, they can further improve their services and provide better quality products. To wrap things up, to have a successful company, one needs to have more than a capable workforce, it needs to have a blend of luck and some daring decisions to start up something new. For instance, Starbucks Corp. which was founded by a few teachers and their friends, and with a simple idea of a company selling overpriced coffee with decent atmosphere. Who could’ve thought that it could be this successful? References 1. Bob Reiss. (2010).  Build a Good Relationship With Suppliers.  Available: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/205868. Last accessed 15th June 2013. 2. Readyratios.com. 2013.  Economic Order Quantity Model (EOQ). [online] Available at: http://www.readyratios.com/reference/analysis/economic_order_quantity_model_eoq.html [Accessed: 16 Jun 2013]. 3. Vos, L. 2013.  People: The Most Important Asset of Any Company. [e-book] Georgia: p. 1. Available through: Georgia SBDC http://www.georgiasbdc.org/pdfs/vos09.pdf [Accessed: 16 Jun 2013].