sigmund freud :: essays research papers

SIGMUND FREUD 1856 - 1939 Freud's story, like most people's stories, begins with others. In his case those others were his mentor and friend, Dr. Joseph Breuer, and Breuer's patient, called Anna O. Anna O. was Joseph Breuer's patient from 1880 through 1882. Twenty one years old, Anna spent most of her time nursing her ailing father. She developed a bad cough that proved to have no physical basis. She developed some speech difficulties, then became mute, and then began speaking only in English, rather than her usual German. When her father died she began to refuse food, and developed an unusual set of problems. She lost the feeling in her hands and feet, developed some paralysis, and began to have involuntary spasms. She also had visual hallucinations and tunnel vision. But when specialists were consulted, no physical causes for these problems could be found. If all this weren't enough, she had fairy-tale fantasies, dramatic mood swings, and made several suicide attempts. Breuer's diagnosis was that she was suffering from what was then called hysteria (now called conversion disorder), which meant she had symptoms that appeared to be physical, but were not. In the evenings, Anna would sink into states of what Breuer called "spontaneous hypnosis," or what Anna herself called "clouds." Breuer found that, during these trance-like states, she could explain her day-time fantasies and other experiences, and she felt better afterwards. Anna called these episodes "chimney sweeping" and "the talking cure." Sometimes during "chimney sweeping," some emotional event was recalled that gave meaning to some particular symptom. The first example came soon after she had refused to drink for a while: She recalled seeing a woman drink from a glass that a dog had just drunk from. While recalling this, she experienced strong feelings of disgust...and then had a drink of water! In other words, her symptom -- an avoidance of water -- disappeared as soon as she remembered its root event, and experienced the strong emotion that would be appropriate to that event. Breuer called this catharsis, from the Greek word for cleansing. It was eleven years later that Breuer and his assistant, Sigmund Freud, wrote a book on hysteria. In it they explained their theory: Every hysteria is the result of a traumatic experience, one that cannot be integrated into the person's understanding of the world. The emotions appropriate to the trauma are not expressed in any direct fashion, but do not simply evaporate: They express themselves in behaviors that in a weak, vague way offer a response to the trauma.

Summary: Charitable Organization and British Way

A summary of the advert that beggars belief.The article â€Å"The advert that beggars belief† by Alexander Chancellor is about beggars in India and Great Britain, they talk about how many beggars there are and what they are using their money on when they get some. Many people try to convince themselves that it's a stupid idea to give beggars money because they use them quite often on many stupid things.Westminster Council making a campaign there says if you give beggars money you â€Å"actually† are guilty in cause of theirs death. It is a bad campaign because they give a wakeup call to people and says it is a bad thing to give money to beggars and you should not do it, because you don’t know what they are going to use their money on and if you do it you can cause their deaths. They call you to stop giving them money.Give an outline of the carious attitudes to charity as expressed in texts.The four texts show the different views of giving charity, there are many ways to donate money today, from when you give a coin to a beggar you see at the streets to send a text on your mobile phone to a charitable organization. The article â€Å"the advert that beggars belief† has a negative attitude to beggars, in Britain they don’t want to give beggars money because they says it can cause their lives because they use the money on drugs or something like that.In the article â€Å"Charity never dies, it only sleeps† we hear about the British way of thinking to improve our own and our families lives, it is best also to improve the lives of those around us. It is a conservative way to think everyone has to be equal. In the article â€Å"the year of charitainment† they talked about that there are so many charity organizations and you have to focus on one and that helps the famous people with, Angelina Jolie helps to focus on Sierra Leone.Comment on the following statement â€Å"to improve our own and our families’ lives, it is best also to improve the lives of those around us.†In the text â€Å"Charity never dies, it only sleeps† it is the British way of thinking: to improve our own and our families’ lives, it is best also to improve the lives of those around us. It is on way out of many to think that everyone has to be equal, there are many people there think of this, and many people think that you have to be selfish about this, and don’t give money to beggars.   

Greek vs Roman Theatre

Historic playwrights such as Sophocles, Euripides, Aeschylus, and Seneca were described as prolific philosophers and geniuses of their times. These men actively participated in the politics surrounding them, and were respected and revered in their society. Each had their own individual style and portrayed their personalities through each of their noted works. Nevertheless, as with a majority of playwrights throughout history, most fodder for their plays have been adaptations of previous plays written by their predecessors or based off mythological events. Unfortunately, this had lead to many speculative accusations and criticisms, as is the case with Senecan tragedies versus their Greek counterparts. Senecan and Greek interpretations of the plays Oedipus, Agamemnon, and Medea bear similar themes, being the inescapability of fate and dike, and the lack of clarity between right and wrong. Nevertheless, they differ culturally, politically, and philosophically due to the differences in society as well as the eras in which the writing of these plays took place. Culturally, Greek and Roman theatre vary in a multitude of ways. Firstly, a major difference is the role of actor within their cultures. The introduction of the actor sparked the creation of tragedy, because of the ability to have back-and-forth discussions. Within Greek culture, to be an actor was a most honourable position as they were considered as icons because â€Å"the good actor, who rises to the challenge of providing a good and consistent performance, can be a model for how to live† (Easterling 382). In contrast, within Roman culture, the actors’ conditions were mean and contemptible (Theatrehistory). A secondary difference is the amount of actors used by Seneca and his Greek counterparts. Seneca stressed the importance of consistency of character stating, â€Å"It is a great thing to play the role of one man† (Easterling 382), suggesting that he seems to disapprove of those who play multiple parts. This is a reason as to why Seneca changed the number of speaking parts in plays to encompass four speaking roles. Agamemnon, for example, has four speaking parts during its final scene involving Aegisthus, Electra, Clytemnestra, and Cassandra (lines 981-1012). Oedipus similarly requires four actors at once for the second act involving Oedipus, Creon, Tiresias, and Manto (lines 201- 402) (Boyle 83). Another cultural difference is in regards to the importance of the masks worn by either the Greeks or Romans during the theatrical performances. The Greek mask was important because it allowed actors to play multiple roles and with the help of the onkos or high headdress, it portrayed the characters, as they ought to be or as better than they are (Wiles 68). The rule of the mask is never in question with Sophocles or Aeschylus as its function was to represent a neutral face. Hence, eliminating all the peculiarities that distinguish each character from another as author John Jones stated, â€Å"The audience could have had a few simple, conventional signs determining rank and age and sex† (Wiles 68). This neutral mask allowed the audience to judge Oedipus and Agamemnon by his actions and not solely on his appearance. It also forced the actor to externalize emotions by using his whole body (Wiles 69). Nevertheless, the conventions of tragic masks do come under pressure by the tragedies of Euripides. Classics professor Froma Zeitlin states that Euripides’ â€Å"repertory of tragedy and epic provides, as it were, a closet of masks for the actors to raid at will, characters in search of identity, a part to play,† which is a main theme in Euripides’ Medea (Wiles 69). In contrast, the cultural context of Roman mask was very different from the Greeks, who believed masked performances were a great source of pride. For a Roman, it was unthinkable that dancing in masks was a source of pride during public celebrations. The use of masks centered on the ideologies of the Roman culture and its concern with the after-life (Wiles 129). The Greek observer Polybius wrote that Roman religion, which was even bound up by death, was â€Å"theatricalised in order that the masses could be controlled by unseen terrors and suchlike tragoidia† (Wiles 129). Therefore, while the Greeks put on masks to create new forms of life, Romans put on masks to resurrect a dead being (Wiles 129). Professional actors received training in life to imitate these dead beings, a reason as to why Seneca disliked the premise of an actor playing multiple roles because actors specialized in one character (Wiles 130). These masks veered away from neutrality to more stock characteristics, much like commedia dell’ arte, and remained as such for recorded history, and because there is records of Seneca performing his work, there is no proof that he used different masks. A final cultural difference is the importance of the chorus and its use in the plays Agamemnon, Oedipus, and Medea. The chorus was not highly involved in the action of the plays. In general, the chorus’ main functions were to create a psychological and emotional background to the action through its odes. It introduces and questions new characters, as well as point out the importance of events as they occurred, to establish facts and avow the outlook of society. Finally, the chorus covers the passage of time, between events, and separates episodes (Calder 21). Within the play Agamemnon, by Aeschylus, the chorus represents the voice of wisdom of the city as well as its limitations (Novelguide). The chorus’ limitations are clear when they fail to appreciate Clytemnestra, (lines 258-63), and their wisdom is seen when they are able to see no end to the problem of dike (Novelguide). In Seneca’s Agamemnon, the chorus of men is replaced for a chorus of Mycenaean women, which is seen through lines 310, 350-51, (Calder 331). They represent enlightenment by rendering individual cases intelligible by juxtaposing the moral crisis (Seneca 113). Similar differences of the chorus can be found within the play Oedipus. In Sophocles’ Oedipus the King, the chorus positions itself within the minds of the audience as the citizens of Thebes acting solely as petitioners with no great affect on the plot. Nevertheless, as the plot unfolds the importance of the chorus grows as they take active roles in the progression of the plot. This continues until the chorus outgrows Oedipus, weaning from his dependence, and becoming the backbone that Oedipus himself uses to confront his destiny, seen in lines 1550 on (Calder 113). This development contrasts with Seneca’s chorus, in his adaptation of Oedipus, as the chorus remains on the same level yet becoming more philosophical in their understanding of fate and justice (Seneca 6). This is seen in lines 980 to 996 as the chorus explains their understanding of fate, stating, â€Å"We are driven by fate, and must yield to fate. No anxious fretting can alter the treads from that commanding spindle [†¦ ] Many are hurt by fear itself, many have come upon their fate through fear of fate† (Seneca 107). This quote demonstrates that no matter what, one will always meet his fate. Finally, differences between Senecan and Greek choruses are also seen within the play Medea as both choruses play crucial but different roles in the development to Medea’s character. In Euripides’ Medea, the chorus enters as a very sympathetic group to Medea’s plight, which is seen when they enter and state, â€Å"I heard the voice, uplifted loud, of our poor Colchian lady† (Euripides 156-7). She is a poor, unfortunate woman whose world is in shambles and the chorus echoes this (Associatedcontent). Whereas, Seneca’s chorus represents the average citizen, not pulling punches when it comes to the scandal that they are witnessing. The chorus begins the play by celebrating the marriage of Jason and Creusa, and juxtaposed with Medea still on stage the chorus states that Creusa’s beauty â€Å"far surpasses all the brides of Athens† (Seneca Medea 75). This demonstrates that the chorus is by no means sympathetic and they do not patronize Medea like the Chorus of Euripides. Seneca's Medea does not need the chorus as a crutch, which is provided to Euripides' Medea (Associatedcontent). Therefore, through the differences in actors, costume, and use of chorus, the cultural aspects of Greek and Romans times play crucial roles in the adaptations of these myths. A second way that Greek and Roman theatre vary from each other is through the political differences of their times. The fist difference is seen through the significant event that occurred during the writing or adaptation of these plays. Although, the main difference is seen through the importance of mythological figures within each play, how they are portrayed, and what they represent. Firstly, each play was written during or after seriously significant events that occurred during Greek times. For example, Aeschylus’ Agamemnon was written and during the battle of Aegina and after the death of Pleistarchus king of Sparta in 480 B.  C. Sophocles’ Oedipus was written after a horrible plague washed over Athens killing one third of the Athenian population (Bispham, Harrison, Sparkes 9). Each of these events affected the audience by tying connections to the events that were occurring around them. In contrast, Seneca’s adaptations were never performed and they were not written during significant events that affected the audience. On the other hand, a major difference came from the depiction of main characters within each play. Within both Aeschylus’ and Seneca’s Agamemnon, Clytemnestra dominates the plot, as Agamemnon himself does not enter the play until line 810. Aeschylus’ Clytemnestra is portrayed as a dangerous temptress, who represents a challenge to patriarchy unparalleled in Greek tragedy as she demonstrates early feminism (RHUL). This is seen through her jealousy of Agamemnon’s status as a man when she tells Agamemnon that he should â€Å"yield† to her (Novelguide). In contrast, Seneca’s Clytemnestra is portrayed as an emotionally unstable and sympathetic woman, as well as representing the working of the passions. This is demonstrated through her desire for a chaste marital relationship with Agamemnon, in lines 239-43 (Seneca 120). Another difference in major characters is seen in the play Oedipus, through the depictions of Oedipus. Sophocles depicts Oedipus initially as a benign ruler amidst his people, self-confident and determined (Seneca 5). This is demonstrated through his opening lines to the audience, â€Å"Deeming it unfit to hear reason from a messenger, I, Oedipus, on whom men rely, have come myself to hear you out† (Sophocles 33). Oedipus represents two enduring themes of Greek myth and drama: the flawed nature of humanity and an individual's powerlessness against the course of destiny in a harsh universe (Seneca 5). In contrast, Seneca’s Oedipus, at the beginning, is isolated and obsessed with anxiety and guilt, as demonstrated in the quote, â€Å"What I fear is unspeakable: that I may kill my father with my own hand† (Seneca 19). Oedipus’ unease is due to his possession of power and in Senecan drama, kingship is typically a source of unease for the ruler (Seneca 7). Seneca’s depiction of Oedipus keeps in turn with his dramas and their concern with mental states. The final contrast of characters and their depictions are found in the play Medea. Euripides’ Medea is seen as lone and forlorn who is portrayed as a pawn of the gods and willing to be such (Associatedcontent). She commits her crime and awaits ramifications from the gods, demonstrated by the line, â€Å"But you'll never have me in your grasp, not in this chariot, a gift to me from my grandfather Helios, to protect me from all hostile hands† (Euripides). Seneca, on the other hand, characterizes Medea as not â€Å"just a woman†, but as a vibrant and vengeful spirit who is more god-like, being in control of her destiny (Associatedcontent). When dealing with her connection with the gods, Seneca’s characterization is the polar opposite of Euripides’ as she is not as respectful and reverent of the gods. She often condemns them for their actions or lack of actions seen in the lines, â€Å"Hecate, I call so many times for your arrows for just one reason, always the same† (Seneca Medea 95). With these political differences, mainly the depiction of historic and mythological figures, it is clear to see that these differences have significant effects on characters as well as plot. Finally, the philosophies of each playwright’s era highly affect the adaptations of the each play because of the differences in philosophical language, seen through the writer’s dialogue. Each playwright’s manner of utilizing dialogue is specifically unique to each individual. Seneca’s dialogues were not platonic exchanges between characters but were treatises (ancienthistory). Seneca’s elaborate rhetoric, argumentation, and complex verbal exchanges were quite unlike the dialogue of Greek tragedy. Furthermore, the ambience of gloom, disease, insanity, and physical horror that permeates his plays is adverse to the spirit of Greek drama (Bispham 296). Aeschylus pioneered drama tension through the addition of the second actor, increasing the possibilities for dramatic dialogue. His language in dialogue is discernible with force, majesty, and emotional intensity (Britannica). Aeschylus boldly uses compound epithets, metaphors, and figurative turns of speech, demonstrated in the quote, â€Å"Winged hounds, eagles of Zeus, slew a poor cowering creature, her unborn young slaughtered with her. She loathes the feast the eagles made. Sorrow sing, sorrow, but good shall prevail with power† (Aeschylus). This description the slaughtering of an animal demonstrates Aeschylus’ rich language binding together the dramatic actions, rather than used as simple decorations (Britannica). It was also common of Aeschylus to sustain a common image or group of images throughout a play, such as the snare in Agamemnon. Sophocles’ major innovation was his introduction of a third actor, which enabled the playwright to both increase the number of his characters and widen the variety of their interactions. The extent of the conflict was extended, plots could be more fluid, and situations could be more complex (Britannica). Sophocles’ language varies depending on the dramatic needs of the current moment within the play. It can be slow and weighty or swift moving, emotionally intense or easygoing, highly decorative or perfectly plain and simple (Britannica).. This can be demonstrated through the quote from Oedipus, â€Å"One man may surpass another in wisdom, yet until I see the prophet’s words proved true never will I agree when Oedipus is blamed; for once the winged maiden came against him and he showed himself wise be the test and good to the state† (Sophocles) . His mastery of form and diction was highly respected by his contemporaries (Britannica). Euripides’ style of dialogue and language is best described as chatter, alluding to both its comparatively light burden and to the talkativeness of his characters of all classes. In spite of this, Euripides’ dialogues have considerable charm and sweetness. This chatter is best described in the quote from Medea, during the scene when she is killing her sons, â€Å" Help me†¦ help†¦ Did you hear that? Did you hear the children cry? That wretched, evil woman! What do I do? How can I escape my mother's hands? I don't know, dear brother. It's over for us† (Euripides). Although this quote does not demonstrate Euripides’ charm and sweetness, in later works, his lyrics underwent a change, becoming more emotional and luxuriant, and this demonstrates the chatter (Britannica). With such contrasting styles and use of dialogue and language, the philosophical differences between Seneca and the Greek playwrights are evident. The differences found within the Greek and Senecan interpretations of the plays Oedipus, Agamemnon, and Medea demonstrate the significant shift of societies and era in which the plays were written and/or adapted. This demonstrates itself through many differences such as the cultural diversity dealing with the actors and their performance, the costumes in respect to the importance of masks, and the movement dealing with the changes in chorus. Political changes demonstrate the differences through the significant events during the staging of the production, whether or not it affected them in any way, and the depiction of historic figures in regards to their portrayal within the play. Finally, philosophical ideologies demonstrate the difference between Greek and Senecan tragedies through the expression of the playwrights through the characters, with the philosophical language of the unique dialogue in which each playwright perfected. Nevertheless, interpreters put their own personalities within the plays and this is what shined through, no matter the criticism. Bibliography http://www.theatrehistory.com/ancient/bellinger001.html http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/seneca/a/Seneca.htm http://www.novelguide.com/Agamemnon/essayquestions.html https://www.britannica.com/biography/Aeschylus-Greek-dramatist?anchor=ref393561

Deception Point Page 58

â€Å"I have an emergency!† The operator was breathless. â€Å"†¦ phone call for the President.† Tench looked incredulous. â€Å"Not now, you don't!† â€Å"It's from Rachel Sexton. She says it's urgent.† The scowl that darkened Tench's face appeared to be more one of puzzlement than anger. Tench eyed the cordless phone. â€Å"That's a house line. That's not secure.† â€Å"No, ma'am. But the incoming call is open anyway. She's on a radiophone. She needs to speak to the President right away.† â€Å"Live in ninety seconds!† Tench's cold eyes stared, and she held out a spider-like hand. â€Å"Give me the phone.† The operator's heart was pounding now. â€Å"Ms. Sexton wants to speak to President Herney directly. She told me to postpone the press conference until she'd talked to him. I assured-â€Å" Tench stepped toward the operator now, her voice a seething whisper. â€Å"Let me tell you how this works. You do not take orders from the daughter of the President's opponent, you take them from me. I can assure you, this is as close as you are getting to the President until I find out what the hell is going on.† The operator looked toward the President, who was now surrounded by microphone technicians, stylists, and several staff members talking him through final revisions of his speech. â€Å"Sixty seconds!† the television supervisor yelled. Onboard the Charlotte, Rachel Sexton was pacing wildly in the tight space when she finally heard a click on the telephone line. A raspy voice came on. â€Å"Hello?† â€Å"President Herney?† Rachel blurted. â€Å"Marjorie Tench,† the voice corrected. â€Å"I am the President's senior adviser. Whoever this is, I must warn you that prank calls against the White House are in violation of-â€Å" For Christ's sake! â€Å"This is not a prank! This is Rachel Sexton. I'm your NRO liaison and-â€Å" â€Å"I am aware of who Rachel Sexton is, ma'am. And I am doubtful that you are she. You've called the White House on an unsecured line telling me to interrupt a major presidential broadcast. That is hardly proper MO for someone with-â€Å" â€Å"Listen,† Rachel fumed, â€Å"I briefed your whole staff a couple of hours ago on a meteorite. You sat in the front row. You watched my briefing on a television sitting on the President's desk! Any questions?† Tench fell silent a moment. â€Å"Ms. Sexton, what is the meaning of this?† â€Å"The meaning is that you have to stop the President! His meteorite data is all wrong! We've just learned the meteorite was inserted from beneath the ice shelf. I don't know by whom, and I don't know why! But things are not what they seem up here! The President is about to endorse some seriously errant data, and I strongly advise-â€Å" â€Å"Wait one goddamned minute!† Tench lowered her voice. â€Å"Do you realize what you are saying?† â€Å"Yes! I suspect the NASA administrator has orchestrated some kind of large-scale fraud, and President Herney is about to get caught in the middle. You've at least got to postpone ten minutes so I can explain to him what's been going on up here. Someone tried to kill me, for God's sake!† Tench's voice turned to ice. â€Å"Ms. Sexton, let me give you a word of warning. If you are having second thoughts about your role in helping the White House in this campaign, you should have thought of that long before you personally endorsed that meteorite data for the President.† â€Å"What!† Is she even listening? â€Å"I'm revolted by your display. Using an unsecured line is a cheap stunt. Implying the meteorite data has been faked? What kind of intelligence official uses a radiophone to call the White House and talk about classified information? Obviously you are hoping someone intercepts this message.† â€Å"Norah Mangor was killed over this! Dr. Ming is also dead. You've got to warn-â€Å" â€Å"Stop right there! I don't know what you're playing at, but I will remind you-and anyone else who happens to be intercepting this phone call-that the White House possesses videotaped depositions from NASA's top scientists, several renowned civilian scientists, and yourself, Ms. Sexton, all endorsing the meteorite data as accurate. Why you are suddenly changing your story, I can only imagine. Whatever the reason, consider yourself relieved of your White House post as of this instant, and if you try to taint this discovery with any more absurd allegations of foul play, I assure you the White House and NASA will sue you for defamation so fast you won't have a chance to pack a suitcase before you go to jail.† Rachel opened her mouth to speak, but no words came. â€Å"Zach Herney has been generous to you,† Tench snapped, â€Å"and frankly this smacks of a cheap Sexton publicity stunt. Drop it right now, or we'll press charges. I swear it.† The line went dead. Rachel's mouth was still hanging open when the captain knocked on the door. â€Å"Ms. Sexton?† the captain said, peering in. â€Å"We're picking up a faint signal from Canadian National Radio. President Zach Herney has just begun his press conference.† 68 Standing at the podium in the White House Briefing Room, Zach Herney felt the heat of the media lights and knew the world was watching. The targeted blitz performed by the White House Press Office had created a contagion of media buzz. Those who did not hear about the address via television, radio, or on-line news invariably heard about it from neighbors, coworkers, and family. By 8:00 P.M., anyone not living in a cave was speculating about the topic of the President's address. In bars and living rooms over the globe, millions leaned toward their televisions in apprehensive wonder. It was during moments like these-facing the world-that Zach Herney truly felt the weight of his office. Anyone who said power was not addictive had never really experienced it. As he began his address, however, Herney sensed something was amiss. He was not a man prone to stage fright, and so the tingle of apprehension now tightening in his core startled him. It's the magnitude of the audience, he told himself. And yet he knew something else. Instinct. Something he had seen. It had been such a little thing, and yet†¦ He told himself to forget it. It was nothing. And yet it stuck. Tench. Moments ago, as Herney was preparing to take the stage, he had seen Marjorie Tench in the yellow hallway, talking on a cordless phone. This was strange in itself, but it was made more so by the White House operator standing beside her, her face white with apprehension. Herney could not hear Tench's phone conversation, but he could see it was contentious. Tench was arguing with a vehemence and anger the President had seldom seen-even from Tench. He paused a moment and caught her eye, inquisitive. Tench gave him the thumbs-up. Herney had never seen Tench give anyone the thumbs-up. It was the last image in Herney's mind as he was cued onto the stage. On the blue rug in the press area inside the NASA habisphere on Ellesmere Island, Administrator Lawrence Ekstrom was seated at the center of the long symposium table, flanked by top NASA officials and scientists. On a large monitor facing them the President's opening statement was being piped in live. The remainder of the NASA crew was huddled around other monitors, teeming with excitement as their commander-in-chief launched into his press conference. â€Å"Good evening,† Herney was saying, sounding uncharacteristically stiff. â€Å"To my fellow countrymen, and to our friends around the world†¦ â€Å" Ekstrom gazed at the huge charred mass of rock displayed prominently in front of him. His eyes moved to a standby monitor, where he watched himself, flanked by his most austere personnel, against a backdrop of a huge American flag and NASA logo. The dramatic lighting made the setting look like some kind of neomodern painting-the twelve apostles at the last supper. Zach Herney had turned this whole thing into a political sideshow. Herney had no choice. Ekstrom still felt like a televangelist, packaging God for the masses.

Questions Speech or Presentation Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Questions - Speech or Presentation Example The Industrial Revolution planted the seeds for the erosion of the employment-at-will doctrine. When employees began forming unions, the collective bargaining agreements were formed and the unions had to negotiate with employers frequently because the agreement had provisions in them that required just cause for adverse employment actions, as well as procedures for arbitrating employee grievances. The 1960s marked the beginning of Federal legislative protections (including Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act) from wrongful discharge based on race, religion, sex, age, and national origin. These protections reflected the changing view of the relationship between employer and employee. Rather than seeing the relationship as being on equal footing, courts and legislatures slowly began to recognize that employers frequently had economic advantages when negotiating with potential or current employees. The recognition of employment as being central to a person’s livelihood and well-being, coupled with the fear of being unable to protect a person’s livelihood from unjust termination, led to the development of common-law, or judicial, exceptions to the employment-at-will doctrine beginning in the late 1950s. Employers should use gender neutral terms when advertising for staff. For example, adverts for a postman, waitress, salesgirl, which use a job description with a sexual implication, are likely to violate the Sex Discrimination Act. Occasionally, however, an employer may be able to lawfully discriminate on grounds of sex or race, for example, a department store could legitimately advertise for male applicants to play Father Christmas. On the basis of above facts it is quite clear that Muhammad pursue a claim for discrimination against Joes Bakery since the discrimination has been made on the grounds of racial discrimination by refusing him the

David A. Sklansky's view of Katz v. United States Essay

David A. Sklansky's view of Katz v. United States - Essay Example (Sklansky, 2006) According to the author, Katz case remains a landmark both because it provides the constitutional framework that continues to govern electronic surveillance, and because it provides the modern test for a 'search' within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment has been the cornerstone in many legal cases for the limits to which the privacy of the person can be breached for the investigation and prosecution of criminal cases. However, the case itself remains rather ambiguous, and there is still doubt, whether taking into account the modern situation after the events of 9/11 electronic surveillance and eavesdropping should be allowed without a warrant Some suppose that the judicial decisions made by Burger and Rehnquist may diminish the effect of Katz's case. It is possible to have a look at least one of the cases ruled by these justices in relation to the Fourth amendment: 'Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979). ... he urgency of the Katz's case is still relevant and even in the light of terrorist threats in the modern society it has its weight, it gives more questions, than answers. It was interesting to note, that actually Katz is viewed as a failure among scholars. It is agreed, that his striving to prove that surveillance is legal, but only under a warranty, is important, but the case itself has not set any reasonable limits for privacy and it should be defined; whether this framework should be adopted outside the domestic law enforcement and what it has to do with the new communication technologies. Sklansky notes, that 'reasonable expectation of privacy sounds nice, but what does it mean' (Sklansky, 2006) The question is absolutely reasonable, taking into account that the privacy has become a subject of major concern now with the cases of privacy breaches more and more frequent, and inability of Courts to define the reasonable privacy limits when it comes to crime. Noting again the events of 9/11 and bearing in mind that terrorist acts' elimination requires special thorough investigation and action, there is a question how privacy issue and national security issue can be weighted by both public safety entities and the court In Katz's case Justice White still left certain space for consideration, noting that in 'national security cases electronic surveillance upon the authorization of the President or the Attorney General could be permissible without prior judicial approval.' (Kitch, 1968) As a result and following the case, the executive Branch has asserted the power to use unwarranted electronic surveillance in the two specific types of national security situations: against foreign intelligence and against domestic subversion. This has been an attempt to weight privacy and

Strategic Intelligence Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 1

Strategic Intelligence - Essay Example Strategic intelligence refers to all processes involving the collection, processing, analyzing and propagation of intelligence, which is essential in forming military plans and policies at both international and national level. A credible strategic intelligence has the potentials to foresight, visioning, motivation, integration of various systems to work together for a common purpose and the ability to partner and form strategic alliances. Strategic intelligence aims at collecting a wide range of data for corporations and militaries with the aim of helping in a certain campaigns such as military wars. It serves the basis for the long term planning and management of various resources. Intelligence services such as Central intelligence Agency of US, secret Intelligence are some of the intelligence services that are well developed. Strategic intelligence dates back to the US government during the cold war. General George Washington was an avid user of intelligence as he used intelligenc e to spy on British forces in Boston. This helped in the evasion of the British at Valley Forge during the continental army (Michael, 2001). In the US, the intelligence community composed of the National security Agency, the CIA, and the Defense Intelligence Agency, is responsible for collecting information, asses the accuracy of this information, define the reliability of the information, and propagate the information to decision makers. These decision makers use the information from intelligence agency and use it to make viable decision and disseminate it to the president and the senate where they use the same information to make policies governing the country. This information includes that of nuclear explorations and the security of the country and information concerning threats to the country. This intelligence agencies work with the approval of the president and their role is to provide information that will be used by the president and the senate to make viable