Compare and contrast the Demographic Transition of one MEDC and one LEDC Essays

Compare and contrast the Demographic Transition of one MEDC and one LEDC Essays Compare and contrast the Demographic Transition of one MEDC and one LEDC Paper Compare and contrast the Demographic Transition of one MEDC and one LEDC Paper Essay Topic: Zone One The two countries that Im going to compare and contrast their Demographic Transitions with each other are England and Wales, being the MECD, and Sri Lanka, being the LECD. Differences The main difference between the two demographic transitions is that the demographic transition for Sri Lanka is entirely a twentieth century occurrence. The data starts at 1911 1920 where the demographic transition for England and Wales starts at 1651 1680. This is a lot earlier. The CDR in England and Wales started to fall a long time before the CDR started to fall in Sri Lanka, it was about 1810 when England and Wales crude death rates started to fall and although you cant be sure exactly when Sri Lankas started to fall it was nearly 100 yrs after. There is also a difference with when the CBR started to decline. With England and Wales it started in about 1891, whereas in Sri Lanka it didnt start to drop until the 1950s. One more difference is that at the present time, England and Wales are in stage 4 of the Demographic Transition, where Sri Lanka is still in stage 3. I think that the further along in the demographic transition a country is, is a sign to show how developed that certain country is. Another difference is that the time that it has taken for both these countries to go through stage 2 and 3 of the demographic transition is different. England and Wales started stage 2 in 1770 and finished stage 3 in about 1950, just under 200 years, whereas Sri Lanka only took about 100 years. Similarities The first similarities that I spotted are that even though they are both in different stages, the stages are very similar. This is shown in stage 2 of both countries where the CBR stays high and the CDR is falling. This is also true of stage 3 in each where the CBR is falling and the CDR is levelling off. Due to the decline in death rate and the birth rate staying as it is, then both countries will find an increase in population. Although this happens at different times. Reasons for Differences and similarities The reason that England and Wales CDR fell a lot earlier than Sri Lanka is because a number of reasons, theses are: Improved sanitation and hygiene brought into all urban areas by the government. This included thing such as covered sewers, water closets and means of sanitary water supply. Public health acts in 1872 and 1875 also helped, inspectors were also brought in for hygiene. Improved food supply brought about by major innovations such as crop rotation, land draining and new farm machinery. With the improvements of communications it also became easier to transport the food to areas of shortage. Reduced impact of infectious disease also helped to lower the CDR. There were many medical advances that made a difference practically in the late 19th century after the national heath service was started in 1946. Whereas in Sri Lanka the CDR fell because of some different reasons, these are: There was control of Malaria brought in which contributed 25-40% of all mortality declines. This wasnt started until 1947 when a DDT scheme got under way. There was better health care brought in, between 1938-48 the number of hospitals doubled from 115 to 246. There was an increase in foreign aid, which also boosted the health care in the country. Growth in the economy took place between1947-52 due to a rise in price for plantation products, which resulted in a higher budget for health care. Once that malaria had been brought under control, zones that once couldnt be farmed due to the malaria before could now be used and this provided more nutrition, thus decreasing CDR in the country. The reason why England and Wales CBR fell before Sri Lankas can once again be split up into smaller reasons, theses are: In 1842 all women and children were excluded from the mines and by 1906 no children under the age of 11 were working. This combined with the compulsory education act of 1867 meant that children were no longer seen as an economic asset. Economic changes such as more women entering work and thus not having children. The growth of ideas such as the publishing of leaflets about contraception also contributed to the decline in CBR. Also the availability of the contraception made a difference. The decline in mortality had an effect also. As more children survived, women needed to have fewer births to achieve the same family size. This is just some of the main similarities and differences between a MEDC and a LEDC, there are many more smaller ones as well as what Ive already put.

Displacement Reaction Definition and Examples

Displacement Reaction Definition and Examples A displacement reaction is a type of reaction where part of one reactant is replaced by another reactant.  A displacement reaction is also known as a replacement reaction or a metathesis reaction.  There are two types of displacement reactions: Single Displacement Reactions Single displacement reactions are reactions where one reactant replaces part of the other.AB C → AC B An example is the reaction between iron and copper sulfate to produce iron sulfate and copper: Fe CuSO4 → FeSO4 Cu Here, both iron and copper have the same valence. One metal cation takes the place of the other bonding to the sulfate anion. Double Displacement Reactions Double displacement reactions are reactions where the cations and anions in the reactants switch partners to form products.AB CD → AD CB An example is the reaction between silver nitrate and sodium chloride to form silver chloride and sodium nitrate: AgNO3 NaCl → AgCl NaNO3

Cultural Diversity in the Nursing Profession Essay

Cultural Diversity in the Nursing Profession - Essay Example There has been in fact a rising practice of what has been termed as "medical tourism" because of the rise in number of people getting more health conscious, seeking alternative ways of improving one's health. The American Nursing Association (ANA) recognizes the vital role knowledge on cultural diversity plays at all levels of nursing practice. When dealing with patients, nurses involve themselves in an interaction of 3 cultural systems: (1) the culture of the nurse; (2) the culture of the client; (3) the culture of the setting. This happens because the nursing profession has gone global, involving health care delivery by people of varied nationality and various cultures (ANA, 1991). With the growing global population composed of multi-cultural oriented people, an ethnocentric approach to nursing practice is no longer advisable. Ethnocentrism is the belief that one's own culture is superior to all others. This belief is common to all cultural groups; all groups regard their own culture as not only the best but also the correct, moral, and only way of life (ANA, 1991). Thus, it is important for nurses to understand various cultures as part of their training. ... e 2008 Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life survey on religious landscape of the United States shows that religious affiliation of the people in the US "are very diverse and fluid" (Pew Forum, 2008). This has significant implication on the nursing profession with religion as a vital component of culture. There are various religious groups around the world. Of particular interest is the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) in the Philippines which comprise almost 3% of the total population (NSO, 1990). Founded in 1914 by Felix Manalo, INC considers itself the "true" Filipino church (Harper, 2001). Among the doctrines it preaches to its members are: (a) there is only one God (as opposed to Christianity's Trinitarian view) and that Jesus Christ is a created being; (b) salvation is dependent on church membership, baptism and works; (c) its founder, Felix Manalo, is regarded as the "angel from the East" (mentioned in Revelation 7) sent by God bringing the final message. From only four ministers and 12 disciples when it was founded on the eve of the World War I, membership grew steadily and by the 1950s, the church was recruiting from 10,000 to 15,000 converts a year. The 1990 Census of Population and Housing places the number of Iglesia members at 1.4 million, three times more than its membership in 1970 (Mangahas, 2002). The INC has members among overseas Filipinos as well and says it has churches in 66 countries, including 39 in the United States, 23 in Asia, 15 in Europe, 11 in Australia and Oceania, and eight in Africa (Mangahas and Olarte, 2002). Over the years, the INC's business interests have grown. A search at the Philippine Securities and Exchange Commission showed that INC leaders are incorporators and board directors in companies engaged in education; medical care,

Teamwork Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Teamwork - Coursework Example Resistance to the approach may be due to the struggle over control of the leadership of the group, which may be due to divergent opinions or challenging the decisions made by the team leader (Cragan 78). Another reason for resistance may be due to hostile leadership where the team leader either may be racist, sexist or practices various discriminatory practices. Resistance in the form of a bid to control the team in terms of ideas may be dealt with by brainstorming of opinions shared by the team players and accommodating everyone’s opinion. Hostile leadership can be controlled by action from all the team players as opposed to the challenger and the team leader holding a private dialogue. Experts view teams as means, not an end in that they view the team as a way of achieving the vision of the organization. An end is described as the goal of the organization where the teams created are deemed as a way of achieving the vision and not the vision itself. Companies that focus on creating teams as opposed to achieving its goals is bound to collapse if the strategy is not looked into (Means 56). A company should focus on the ultimate aim of attaining its goals, which may be achieved by formation of teams among other strategies (Rothstein 100). It is important that team members analyze their team role at their work place, their contribution and whether or not they are comfortable with their specific position. The roles of team players may be categorized into task roles, nurturing roles and dysfunctional roles. One can become a better team member by understanding their responsibility and understanding that the decisions that they make affect the overall performance of the team. The concept of self-management of employees is highly successful in organizations where the decision-making by employees is embraced (Cheltenham 60). Self-managed groups are held

Social Justice Essay Example for Free

Social Justice Essay Social justice is defined as justice exercised within a society, particularly as it is exercised by and among the various social classes of that society. A socially just society is defined by its advocates and practitioners as being based on the principles of equality and solidarity; this pedagogy also maintains that the socially just society both understands and values human rights, as well as recognizing the dignity of every human being.[1][2] The Constitution of the International Labour Organization affirms that universal and lasting peace can be established only if it is based upon social justice. [3]Furthermore, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action treats social justice as a purpose of the human rights education.[4] The term and modern concept of social justice was coined by the Jesuit Luigi Taparelli in 1840 based on the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas and given further exposure in 1848 byAntonio Rosmini-Serbati.[1][2][5][6][7] The phrase has taken on a very controverted and variable meaning, depending on who is using it. The idea was elaborated by the moral theologian John A. Ryan, who initiated the concept of a living wage. Father Coughlin also used the term in his publications in the 1930s and the 1940s. It is a part of Catholic social teaching, the Protestants Social Gospel, and is one of the Four Pillars of the Green Partyupheld by green parties worldwide. Social justice as a secular concept, distinct from religious teachings, emerged mainly in the late twentieth century, influenced primarily by philosopher John Rawls. Some tenets of social justice have been adopted by those on theleft of the political spectrum. - Theories of social justice [edit]Social justice from religious traditions [edit]Judaism Main article: Tikkun olam In To Heal a Fractured World: The Ethics of Responsibility, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks states that social justice has a central place inJudaism. One of Judaism’s most distinctive and challenging ideas is its ethics of responsibility reflected in the concepts of simcha(gladness or joy), tzedakah (the religious obligation to perform charity and philanthropic acts), chesed (deeds of kindness), andtikkun olam (repairing the world). Christianity Catholicism Main article: Catholic social teaching Catholic social teaching consists of those aspects of Roman Catholic doctrine which relate to matters dealing with the collective aspect of humanity. A distinctive feature of the Catholic social doctrine is their concern for the poorest members of society. Two of the seven key areas[8] of Catholic social teaching are pertinent to social justice: * Life and dignity of the human person: The foundational principle of all Catholic Social Teaching is the sanctity of all human life and the inherent dignity of every human person. Human life must be valued above all material possessions. * Preferential option for the poor and vulnerable: Catholics believe Jesus taught that on the Day of Judgement God will ask what each person did to help the poor and needy: Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.[9] The Catholic Church believes that through words, prayers and deeds one must show solidarity with, and compassion for, the poor. The moral tes t of any society is how it treats its most vulnerable members. The poor have the most urgent moral claim on the conscience of the nation. People are called to look at public policy decisions in terms of how they affect the poor.[10] Even before it was propounded in the Catholic social doctrine, social justice appeared regularly in the history of the Catholic Church: * The term social justice was adopted by the Jesuit Luigi Taparelli in the 1840s, based on the work of St. Thomas Aquinas. He wrote extensively in his journal Civiltà   Cattolica, engaging both capitalist and socialist theories from a natural law viewpoint. His basic premise was that the rival economic theories, based on subjective Cartesian thinking, undermined the unity of society present in Thomistic metaphysics; neither the liberal capitalists nor the communists concerned themselves with public moral philosophy. * Pope Leo XIII, who studied under Taparelli, published in 1891 the encyclical Rerum Novarum (On the Condition of the Working Classes), rejecting both socialism and capitalism, while defending labor unions and private property. He stated that society should be based on cooperation and not class conflict and competition. In this document, Leo set out the Catholic Churchs response to the social instability and labor conflict that had arisen in the wake of industrialization and had led to the rise of socialism. The Pope advocated that the role of the State was to promote social justice through the protection of rights, while the Church must speak out on social issues in order to teach correct social principles and ensure class harmony. * The encyclical Quadragesimo Anno (On Reconstruction of the Social Order, literally in the fortieth year) of 1931 by Pope Pius XI, encourages a living wage, subsidiarity, and advocates that social justice is a personal virtue as well as an attribute of the social order, saying that society can be just only if individuals and institutions are just. * Pope John Paul II added much to the corpus of the Catholic social teaching, penning three encyclicals which would deal with issues such as economics, politics, geo-political situations, ownership of the means of production, private property and the social mortgage, and private property. The encyclicals of Laborem Exercens, Solicitudo Rei Socialis, and Centesimus Annus are just a small portion of his overall contribution to Catholic social justice. Pope John Paul II was a strong advocate of justice and human rights, and spoke forcefully for the poor. He addresses issues such as the problems that technology can present should it be misused, and admits a fear that the progress of the world is not true progress at all, if it should denigrate the value of the human person. * Pope Benedict XVIs encyclical Deus Caritas Est (God is Love) of 2006 claims that justice is the defining concern of the state and the central concern of politics, and not of the church, which has charity as its central social concern. It said that the laity has the specific responsibility of pursuing social justice in civil society and that the churchs active role in social justice should be to inform the debate, using reason and natural law, and also by providing moral and spiritual formation for those involved in politics. * The official Catholic doctrine on social justice can be found in the book Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, published in 2004 and updated in 2006, by the Pontifical Council Iustitia et Pax. Methodism From its founding, Methodism was a Christian social justice movement. Under John Wesleys direction, Methodists became leaders in many social justice issues of the day, including the prison reform andabolitionism movements. Wesley himself was among the first to preach for slaves rights attracting significant opposition.[11][12][13] Today, social justice plays a major role in the United Methodist Church. The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church says, it is a governmental responsibility to provide all citizens with health care.[14] The United Methodist Church also teaches Population control as part of its doctrine.[15] Hinduism Ancient Hindu society was based on equality of all beings. However, to divide labor society divided itself into hundreds of tribes[Jati]. India was governed by people of non-Hindu faiths from the 8th century which caused ruptures in societal fabric. Caste is a word from the Portuguese word casta and caste came to define the jatis only 500 years ago. Considerable social engineering occurred during the British rule which impacted the societys self governance. There was some social injustice in which some jatis considered themselves superior to others (just as in the western societies). The present day jati hierarchy is undergoing changes for variety of reasons including social justice,which is a politically popular stance in democratic India. Institutionalized affirmative action has swung the pendulum. The disparity and wide inequalities in social behaviour to some of the jatis led to various reform movements in hinduism for centuries. While legally outlawed, the caste system remains s trong in practice, with social and employment opportunities strongly governed by ones caste of birth.[16] Vivekanandas calls to promote social justice have been largely heeded. Of course there is room for improvement as in the rest of the world. Islam | This section requires expansion. (July 2011)| The Quran contains numerous references to elements of social justice. For example, one of Islams Five Pillars is ZakÄ t, or alms-giving. Charity and assistance to the poor – concepts central to social justice – are and have historically been important parts of the Islamic faith. In Muslim history, Islamic governance has often been associated with social justice. Establishment of social justice was one of the motivating factors of the Abbasid revolt against the Umayyads.[17] The Shiite believe that the return of the Mahdi will herald in the messianic age of justice and the Mahdi along with the Messiah (Jesus) will end plunder, torture, oppression and discrimination.[18] For the Muslim Brotherhood the implementation of social justice would require the rejection of consumerism and communism. The Brotherhood strongly affirmed the right to private property as well as differences in personal wealth due to factors such as hard work. However, the Brotherhood held Muslims had an obligation to assist those Muslims in need. It held that zakat (alms-giving) was not voluntary charity, but rather the poor had the right to assistance from the more fortunate.[19] [edit]John Rawls Main article: John Rawls Political philosopher John Rawls draws on the utilitarian insights of Bentham and Mill, the social contract ideas of John Locke, and thecategorical imperative ideas of Kant. His first statement of principle was made in A Theory of Justice where he proposed that, Each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare of society as a whole cannot override. For this reason justice denies that the loss of freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others..[20] A deontological proposition that echoes Kant in framing the moral good of justice in absolutist terms. His views are definitively restated in Political Liberalism where society is seen as a fair system of co-operation over time, from one generation to the next..[21] All societies have a basic structure of social, economic, and political institutions, both formal and informal. In testing how well these elements fit and work together, Rawls based a key test of legitimacy on the theories of soc ial contract. To determine whether any particular system of collectively enforced social arrangements is legitimate, he argued that one must look for agreement by the people who are subject to it, but not necessarily to an objective notion of justice based on coherent ideological grounding. Obviously, not every citizen can be asked to participate in a poll to determine his or her consent to every proposal in which some degree of coercion is involved, so one has to assume that all citizens are reasonable. Rawls constructed an argument for a two-stage process to determine a citizens hypothetical agreement: * The citizen agrees to be represented by X for certain purposes, and, to that extent, X holds these powers as a trustee for the citizen. * X agrees that enforcement in a particular social context is legitimate. The citizen, therefore, is bound by this decision because it is the function of the trustee to represent the citizen in this way. This applies to one person who represents a small group (e.g., the organiser of a social event setting a dress code) as equally as it does to national governments, which are ultimate trustees, holding representative powers for the benefit of all citizens within their territorial boundaries. Governments that fail to provide for welfare of their citizens according to the principles of justice are not legitimate. To emphasise the general principle that justice should rise from the people and not be dictated by the law-making powers of governments, Rawls asserted that, There is a general presumption against imposing legal and other restrictions on conduct without sufficient reason. But this presumption creates no special priority for any particular liberty.[22] This is support for an unranked set of liberties that reasonable citizens in all states should respect and uphold — to some extent, the list proposed by Rawls matches the normative human rights that have international recognition and direct enforcement in some nation states where the citizens need encouragement to act in a way that fixes a greater degree of equality of outcome. The basic liberties according to Rawls * Freedom of thought; * Liberty of conscience as it affects social relationships on the grounds of religion, philosophy, and morality; * Political liberties (e.g. representative democratic institutions, freedom of speech and the press, and freedom of assembly); * Freedom of association; * Freedoms necessary for the liberty and integrity of the person (viz: freedom from slavery, freedom of movement and a reasonable degree of freedom to choose ones occupation); and * Rights and liberties covered by the rule of law. Criticism The concept of social justice has come under criticism from a variety ofperspectives. Many authors criticize the idea that there exists an objective standard of social justice. Moral relativists deny that there is any kind of objective standard for justice in general. Non-cognitivists, moral skeptics, moral nihilists, and most logical positivists deny the epistemic possibility of objective notions of justice. Cynics (such as Niccolà ² Machiavelli[citation needed]) believe that any ideal of social justice is ultimately a mere justification for the status quo. Many other people accept some of the basic principles of social justice, such as the idea that all human beings have a basic level of value, but disagree with the elaborate conclusions that may or may not follow from this. One example is the statement by H. G. Wellsthat all people are equally entitled to the respect of their fellowmen.[23] On the other hand, some scholars reject the very idea of social justice as meaningless, re ligious, self-contradictory, and ideological, believing that to realize any degree of social justice is unfeasible, and that the attempt to do so must destroy all liberty. Perhaps the most complete rejection of the concept of social justice comes from Friedrich Hayek of the Austrian School of economics: There can be no test by which we can discover what is socially unjust because there is no subject by which such an injustice can be committed, and there are no rules of individual conduct the observance of which in the market order would secure to the individuals and groups the position which as such (as distinguished from the procedure by which it is determined) would appear just to us. [Social justice] does not belong to the category of error but to that of nonsense, like the term `a moral stone.[24] Ben ONeill of the University of New South Wales argues that, for proponents of social justice:[25] the notion of rights is a mere term of entitlement, indicative of a claim for any possible desirable good, no matter how important or trivial, abstract or tangible, recent or ancient. It is merely an assertion of desire, and a declaration of intention to use the language of rights to acquire said desire. In fact, since the program of social justice inevitably involves claims for government provision of goods, paid for through the efforts of others, the term actually refers to an intention to useforce to acquire ones desires. Not to earn desirable goods by rational thought and action, production and voluntary exchange, but to go in there and forcibly take goods from those who can supply them! Janusz Korwin-Mikke argues simply: Either social justice has the same meaning as justice – or not. If so – why use the additional word social? We lose time, we destroy trees to obtain paper necessary to print this word. If not, if social justice means something different from justice – then something different from justice is by definition injustice' Sociologist Carl L. Bankston has argued that a secular, leftist view of social justice entails viewing the redistribution of goods and resources as based on the rights of disadvantaged categories of people, rather than on compassion or national interest. Bankston maintains that this secular version of social justice became widely accepted due to the rise of demand-side economics and to the moral influence of the civil rights movement.[26] Cosmic values Hunter Lewis work promoting natural healthcare and sustainable economies advocates for conservation as a key premise in social justice. His manifesto on sustainability ties the continued thriving of human life to real conditions, the environment supporting that life, and associates injustice with the detrimental effects of unintended consequences of human actions. Quoting classical Greek thinkers like Epicurus on the good of pursuing happiness, Hunter also cites ornithologist, naturalist, and philosopher Alexander Skutch in his book Moral Foundations: The common feature which unites the activities most consistently forbidden by the moral codes of civilized peoples is that by their very nature they cannot be both habitual and enduring, because they tend to destroy the conditions which make them possible.[27] Pope Benedict XVI cites Teilhard de Chardin in a vision of the cosmos as a living host [28] embracing an understanding of ecology that includes mankindss relationship to fellow me n, that pollution affects not just the natural world but interpersonal relations also. Cosmic harmony, justice and peace are closely interrelated: If you want to cultivate peace, protect creation.[29] - Social justice movements Social justice is also a concept that is used to describe the movement towards a socially just world, i.e., the Global Justice Movement. In this context, social justice is based on the concepts of human rights and equality, and can be defined as the way in which human rights are manifested in the everyday lives of people at every level of society.[30] A number of movements are working to achieve social justice in society.[31][32] These movements are working towards the realization of a world where all members of a society, regardless of background or procedural justice, have basic human rights and equal access to the benefits of their society. Interfaith Social Assistance Reform Coalition The Interfaith Social Justice Reform Coalition (ISARC) is Ontarios largest interfaith organization dedicated to faith-based approaches to public policy reform in the areas of social justice and poverty eradication. ISARC has a shared hope to mobilize, facilitate, and empower diverse faith communities to research, educate and advocate for public policy for the elimination of poverty in Ontario. ISARCs values include human dignity, social equity, mutual responsibility, fiscal fairness, economic equity and environmental sustainability. Since 1986, ISARC has been a leader in mobilizing faith communities to advocate for systemic change in the Province of Ontario, Canada. Liberation theology Main article: Liberation theology Liberation theology[33] is a movement in Christian theology which conveys the teachings of Jesus Christ in terms of a liberation from unjust economic, political, or social conditions. It has been described by proponents as an interpretation of Christian faith through the poors suffering, their struggle and hope, and a critique of society and the Catholic faith and Christianity through the eyes of the poor,[34] and by detractors as Christianity perverted by Marxism and Communism.[35] Although liberation theology has grown into an international and inter-denominational movement, it began as a movement within theCatholic Church in Latin America in the 1950s – 1960s. It arose principally as a moral reaction to the poverty caused by social injusticein that region. It achieved prominence in the 1970s and 1980s. The term was coined by the Peruvian priest, Gustavo Gutià ©rrez, who wrote one of the movements most famous books, A Theology of Liberation (1971). According to Sarah Kleeb, Marx would surely take issue, she writes, with the appropriation of his works in a religious contextthere is no way to reconcile Marxs views of religion with those of Gutierrez, they are simply incompatible. Despite this, in terms of their understanding of the necessity of a just and righteous world, and the nearly inevitable obstructions along such a path, the two have much in common; and, particularly in the first edition of [A Theology of Liberation], the use of Marxian theory is quite evident.[36][dead link] Other noted exponents are Leonardo Boff of Brazil, Jon Sobrino of El Salvador, and Juan Luis Segundo of Uruguay.[37][38] Social justice in healthcare Social justice has more recently made its way into the field of bioethics. Discussion involves topics such as affordable access to health care, especially for low income households and families. The discussion also raises questions such as whether society should bear healthcare costs for low income families, and whether the global marketplace is a good thing to deal with healthcare. Ruth Faden and Madison Powers of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics focus their analysis of social justice on which inequalities matter the most. They develop a social justice theory that answers some of these questions in concrete settings. Social injustices occur when there is a preventable difference in health states among a population of people. These social injustices take on the form of health inequities when negative health states such as malnourishment, and infectious diseases are more prevalent among an impoverished nation.[39] These negative health states can often be prevented by providing social and economic structures such as Primary Healthcare which ensure the general population has equal access to health care services regardless of income level, gender, education or any other stratifying factor. Integrating social justice to health inherently reflects the social determinants of health model without discounting the role of the bio-medical model.[40] [edit]Social justice and human rights education Main article: Human rights education The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action affirm that Human rights education should include peace, democracy, development and social justice, as set forth in international and regional human rights instruments, in order to achieve common understanding and awareness with a view to strengthening universal commitment to human rights.[41] A general definition of social justice is hard to arrive at and even harder to implement. In essence, social justice is concerned with equal justice, not just in the courts, but in all aspects of society. This concept demands that people have equal rights and opportunities; everyone, from the poorest person on the margins of society to the wealthiest deserves an even playing field. But what do the words â€Å"just† or â€Å"fair† mean, and what defines equal? Who should be responsible for making sure society is a just and fair place? How do you implement policies regarding social justice? Alternately, should you legislate for justice in society or merely rely on the moral compass of society’s members? From a political stance that is leftist, you must legislate to create a just society, and various programs need to exist in order to collect monies needed to even the playing field between rich, middle class, poor and those people who are routinely marginalized by s ociety. Equal rights can be defined as equal access to things that make it possible for people in any societal sector to be successful. Therefore, leftist philosophy would support things like anti-discrimination laws and equal opportunity programs, and would favor taxation, especially of those who make a lot of money, to pay for programs that help provide equality for all. The far left would argue that there are certain basic needs that must be offered to all. These include things like truly equal education and safety in all schools and programs that would help all children have the financial opportunity to attend college. Far left groups, often termed socialist even if they differ from true definitions of socialism, further argue that a just society cannot be had unless everyone has access to food, safe shelter and medical care. The way to achieve this is through taxation and government implementation of programs that will guarantee these things for all people. The right political stance equally endorses a just society, but may criticize those who make poor choices and feel that while equal opportunity should exist, a government should not legislate for this. In fact it is argued that social justice is diminished when governments create programs to deal with it, especially when these programs call for greater taxation. Instead, those who have more money should be encouraged to be philanthropic, not by paying higher taxes, which is arguably unjust. From a religious perspective, you’ll find people all over the political spectrum who argue forsocial justice. Many Christian groups believe that you bring about justice through Christlike actions of mercy, especially those that help people who have been marginalized by society. Islamic perspective on social justice is similar; one of the Five Pillars of Islam is that all must give to the poor. However, certain sects of Islam promote views of women and men as different; women are not equal to and are subservient to men. The postmodern critique on the idea of a just society provokes interesting debate. Can there ever be a just society? Can we ever view all people as inherently equal and entitled to the same rights and privileges? It’s hard to know, since most philosophers would argue that no one has ever created a completely just society, where all people have an even chance. Even in the most socialist nations, there is poverty and unequal distribution of wealth. In societies like the US, which hinge on creating social justice, we have distinct problems, like hungry children, homelessness, and problems with making sure all children receive the same high standard of education. This is no reason to abandon attempting to promote a just society and trying to aim for it. Yet due to the complex nature of society, the US may not ever fully achieve justice for all, and the debate of how to achieve this state is ongoing. â€Å"Social justice is about equality and fairness between human beings. It works on the universal principles that guide people in knowing what is right and what is wrong. This is also about keeping a balance between groups of people in a society or a community. Social justice is an underlying principle for peaceful and prosperous coexistence within and among nations. We uphold the principles of social justice when we promote gender equality or the rights of indigenous peoples and migrants. We advance social justice when we remove barriers that people face because of gender, age, race, ethnicity, religion, culture or disability.† Source: United Nations Our Commitment To Social Justice As Social Justice refers to creating a society that is based on the principles of equality and understanding the value of human rights, it is in direct alignment with our organisational values and philosophy. As an organisation of over 650 staff, we have embraced the Social Justice message and looked at powerful ways to raise awareness and showcase our advocacy for Social Justice throughout the community. FSGA collectively advocates for Social Justice by giving it a regular ‘Day’. Every Wednesday all FSGA staff are encouraged to wear something orange, to remind them of the FSGA value and philosophy and what we are advocating and working towards. The signature of modern leftist rhetoric is the deployment of terminology that simply cannot fail to command assent. As Orwell himself recognized, even slavery could be sold if labeled freedom. In this vein, who could ever conscientiously oppose the pursuit of social justice, i.e., a just society? To understand social justice, we must contrast it with the earlier view of justice against which it was conceived one that arose as a revolt against political absolutism. With a government (e.g., a monarchy) that is granted absolute power, it is impossible to speak of any injustice on its part. If it can do anything, it cant do anything wrong. Justice as a political/legal term can begin only when limitations are placed upon the sovereign, i.e., when men define what is unjust for government to do. The historical realization traces from the Roman senate to Magna Carta to the U.S. Constitution to the 19th century. It was now a matter of justice that government not arrest citizens arbitrarily , sanction their bondage by others, persecute them for their religion or speech, seize their property, or prevent their travel. This culmination of centuries of ideas and struggles became known as liberalism. And it was precisely in opposition to this liberalism not feudalism or theocracy or the ancien rà ©gime, much less 20th century fascism that Karl Marx formed and detailed the popular concept of social justice, (which has become a kind of new and improved substitute for a storeful of other terms Marxism, socialism, collectivism that, in the wake of Communisms history and collapse, are nowunsellable). The history of all existing society, he and Engels declared, is the history of class struggles. Freeman and slave, patrician and plebian, lord and serf oppressor and oppressed, stood in sharp opposition to each other. They were quite right to note the political castes and resulting clashes of the pre-liberal era. The expositors of liberalism (Spencer, Maine) saw their ethic, by establishing the political equality of all (e.g., the abolition of slavery, serfdom, and inequality of rights), as moving manki nd from a society of status to a society of contract. Alas, Marx the Prophet could not accept that the classless millenium had arrived before he did. Thus, he revealed to a benighted humanity that liberalism was in fact merely another stage of Historys class struggle capitalism with its own combatants: the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. The former were manual laborers, the latter professionals and business owners. Marxs classes were not political castes but occupations. Today the terms have broadened to mean essentially income brackets. If Smith can make a nice living from his writing, hes a bourgeois; if Jones is reciting poetry for coins in a subway terminal, hes a proletarian. But the freedoms of speech and enterprise that they share equally are nothing but lies and falsehoods so long as their differences in affluence and influence persist (Luxemburg). The unbroken line from The Communist Manifesto to its contemporary adherents is that economic inequality is the monstrous injustice of the capitalist system, which must be replaced by an ideal of social justice a classless society created by the elimination of all differences in wealth and power. Give Marx his due: He was absolutely correct in identifying the political freedom of liberalism the right of each man to do as he wishes with his own resources as the origin of income disparity under capitalism. If Smith is now earning a fortune w hile Jones is still stuck in that subway, its not because of the class into which each was born, to say nothing of royal patronage. They are where they are because of how the common man spends his money. Thats why some writers sell books in the millions, some sell them in the thousands, and still others cant even get published. It is the choices of the masses (the market) that create the inequalities of fortune and fame and the only way to correct those injustices is to control those choices. Every policy item on the leftist agenda is merely a deduction from this fundamental premise. Private property and the free market of exchange are the most obvious hindrances to the implementation of that agenda, but hardly the only. Also verboten is the choice to emigrate, which removes one and ones wealth from the pool of resources to be redirected by the demands of social justice and its enforcers. And crucial to the justification of a classless society is the undermining of any notion that individuals are responsible for their behavior and its consequences. To maintain the illusion that classes still exist under capitali sm, it cannot be conceded that the haves are responsible for what they have or that the have nots are responsible for what they have not. Therefore, people are what they are because of where they were born into the social order as if this were early 17th century France. Men of achievement are pointedly referred to as the priviliged as if they were given everything and earned nothing. Their seeming accomplishments are, at best, really nothing more than the results of the sheer luck of a beneficial social environment (or even in the allowance of one egalitarian, John Rawls natural endowment). Consequently, the haves do not deserve what they have. The flip side of this is the insistence that the have nots are, in fact, the underpriviliged, who have been denied their due by an unjust society. If some men wind up behind bars, they are (to borrow from Broadway) depraved only because they are deprived. Environmental determinism, once an almost sacred doctrine of official Soviet academe, thrives as the social constructionist orthodoxy of todays anti-capitalist left. The theory of behavioral scientists and their boxed rats serviceably parallels the practice of a Central Planning Board and its closed society. The imperative of economic equality also generates a striking opposition between social justice and its liberal rival. The equality of the latter, weve noted, is the equality of all individuals in the eyes of the law the protection of the political rights of each man, irrespective of class (or any assigned collective identity, hence the blindfold of Justice personified). However, this political equality, also noted, spawns the difference in class between Smith and Jones. All this echoes Nobel laureate F.A. Hayeks observation that if we treat them equally [politically], the result must be inequality in their actual [i.e., economic] position. The irresistable conclusion is that the only way to place them in an equal [economic] position would be to treat them differently [politically] precisely the conclusion that the advocates of social justice themselves have always reached. In the nations that had instituted this resolution throughout their legal systems, different political treatm ent came to subsume the extermination or imprisonment of millions because of their class origins. In our own American mixed economy, which mixes differing systems of justice as much as economics, social justice finds expression in such policies and propositions as progressive taxation and income redistribution; affirmative action and even reparations, its logical implication; and selective censorship in the name of substantive equality, i.e., economic equality disingenuously reconfigured as a Fourteenth Amendment right and touted as the moral superior to formal equality, the equality of political freedom actually guaranteed by the amendment. This last is the project of a growing number of leftist legal theorists that includes Cass Sunstein and Catherine MacKinnon, the latter opining that the law of [substantive] equality and the law of freedom of expression [for all] are on a collision course in this country. Interestingly, Hayek had continued, Equality before the law and material equality are, therefore, not only different, but in conflict with each other a pronouncement that e vidently draws no dissent. Hayek emphasized another conflict between the two conceptions of justice, one we can begin examining simply by asking who the subject of liberal justice is. The answer: a person a flesh-and-blood person, who is held accountable for only those actions that constitute specifically defined crimes of violence (robbery, rape, murder) against other citizens. Conversely, who is the subject of social justice society? Indeed yes, but is society really a who? When we speak of social psychology (the standard example), no one believes that there is a social psyche whose thoughts can be analyzed. And yet the very notion of social justice presupposes a volitional Society whose actions can (and must) be held accountable. This jarring bit of Platonism traces all the way back to Marx himself, who, despite all his anti-Idealistic and anti-Hegelian rhetoric, is really an Idealist and Hegelian asserting, at root, that [Society] precedes and determines the characteristics of those who are [its] members (R.A. Childs, Jr.). Behold leftisms alternative to liberalisms atomistic individualism: reifying collectivism, what Hayek called anthropomorphism or person ification. Too obviously, it is not liberalism that atomizes an entity (a concrete), but social justice that reifies an aggregate (an abstraction). And exactly what injustice is Society responsible for? Of course: the economic inequality between Smith and Jones and Johnson and Brown and all others. But there is no personified Society who planned and perpetrated this alleged inequity, only a society of persons acting upon the many choices made by their individual minds. Eventually, though, everyone recognizes that this Ideal of Society doesnt exist in the real world leaving two options. One is to cease holding society accountable as a legal entity, a moral agent. The other is to conclude that the only practicable way to hold society accountable for its actions is to police the every action of every individual. The apologists for applied social justice have always explained away its relationship to totalitarianism as nothing more than what we may call (after Orwells Animal Farm) the Napoleon scenario: the subversion of earnest revolutions by demented individuals (e.g., Stalin, Mao to name just two among too many). What can never be admitted is that authoritarian brutality is the not-merely-possible-but-inevitable realization of the nature of social justice itself. What is social justice? The theory that implies and justifies the practice of socialism. And what is socialism? Domination by the State. What is socialized is state-controlled. So what is totalitarian socialism other than total socialism, i.e., state control of everything? And what is that but the absence of a free market in anything, be it goods or ideas? Those who contend that a socialist government need not be totalitarian, that it can allow a free market independent choice, the very source of inequality! in some things (ideas) and not in others (goods as if, say, books were one or the other), are saying only that the socialist ethic shouldnt be applied consistently. This is nothing less than a confession of moral cowardice. It is the explanation for why, from Moscow to Managua, all the rivalries within the different socialist revolutions have been won by, not the democratic or libertarian socialists, but the totalitarians, i.e., those who dont qualify their socialism with antonyms. Totalitarian socialism is not a variation but a redundancy, which is why half-capitalist hypocrites will always lose out to those who have the courage of their socialist convictions. (Likewise, someone whose idea of social justice is a moderate welfare state is someone whos willing to tolerate far more social injustice than hes willing to eliminate.) What is social justice? The abolition of privacy. Its repudiation of property rights, far from being a fundamental, is merely one derivation of this basic principle. Socialism, declared Marx, advocates the positive abolition of private property [in order to effect] the return of man himself as a social, i.e., really human, being. It is the private status of property meaning: the privacy, not the property that stands in opposition to the social (i.e., socialized, and thus really human) nature of man. Observe that the premise holds even when we substitute x for property. If private anything denies mans social nature, then so does private everything. And it is the negation of anything and everything private from work to worship to even family life that has been the social affirmation of the socialist state. What is social justice? The opposite of capitalism. And what is capitalism? It is Marxs coinage (minted by his materialist dispensation) for the Western liberalism that diminished state power from absolutism to limited government; that, from John Locke to the American Founders, held that each individual has an inviolable right to his own life, liberty, and property, which government exists solely to secure. Now what would the reverse of this be but a resurrection of Oriental despotism, the reactionary increase of state power from limited government to absolutism, i.e., totalitarianism, the absolute control of absolutely everything? And what is the opposite the violation of securing the life, liberty, and property of all men other than mass murder, mass tyranny, and mass plunder? And what is that but the point at which theory ends and history begins? And yet even before that point before the 20th century, before publication of the Manifesto itself there were those who did indeed make the connection between what Marxism inherently meant on paper and what it would inevitably mean in practice. In 1844, Arnold Ruge presented the abstract: a police and slave state. And in 1872, Michael Bakunin provided the specifics: [T]he Peoples State of Marx will not content itself with administering and governing the masses politically, as all governments do today. It will also administer the masses economically, concentrating in the hands of the State the production and division of wealth, the cultivation of land, the establishment and development of factories, the organization and direction of commerce, and finally the application of capital to production by the only banker the State. All that will demand an immense knowledge and many heads overflowing with brains in this government. It will be the reign of scientific intelligence, the most aristocratic, despotic, arrogant, and elitist of all regimes. There will be a new class, a new hierarchy of real and counterfeit scientists and scholars, and the world will be divided into a minority ruling in the name of knowledge, and an immense ignorant majority. And then, woe unto the mass of ignorant ones! It is precisely this new class that reflects the defining contradiction of modern leftist reality: The goal of complete economic equality logically enjoins the means of complete state control, yet this means has never practically achieved that end. Yes, Smith and Jones, once socialized, are equally poor and equally oppressed, but now above them looms an oligarchy of not-to-be-equalized equalizers. The inescapable rise of this new class privileged economically as well as politically, never quite ready to wither away forever destroys the possibility of a classless society. Here the lesson of socialism teaches what should have been learned from the lesson of pre-liberal despotism that state coercion is a means to no end but its own. Far from expanding equality from the political to the economic realm, the pursuit of social justice serves only to contract it within both. There will never be any kind of equality or real justice as long as a socialist elite stands behind the trigger w hile the rest of us kneel before the barrel. Further Reading The contemporary left remains possessed by the spirit of Marx, present even where hes not, and the best overview of his ideology remains Thomas SowellsMarxism: Philosophy and Economics, which is complemented perfectly by the most accessible refutation of that ideology, David Conways A Farewell to Marx. Hayeks majestic The Mirage of Social Justice is a challenging yet rewarding effort, while his The Road to Serfdom provides an unparalleled exposition of how freedom falls to tyranny. Moving from theory to practice, Communism: A History, Richard Pipes slim survey, ably says all that is needed.

Racism in the Chesapeake Area Essays -- Chesapeake Area Racism Racist

Racism in the Chesapeake Area The Chesapeake area in the seventeenth century was a unique community that was almost absent of racism. In this community, at this time, property was the central and primary definition of one’s place in society. The color of one’s skin was not a fundamental factor in being a well respected and valued member of the community. Virginia’s Eastern Shore represented a very small fellowship of people that were not typical of the Southern ideals during this time period and gave free blacks owning property a great deal of respect and merit usually equal to that of any white man around. Racism, as a generalization, was a common and mostly unified way of thinking in the Southern states for a very long time and was in its prime during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The first importation of slaves into Virginia was in late August of 1619 and was only briefly recorded by one colonist, John Rolfe. He recorded them as â€Å"20. and odd Negroes† and from this the black population slowly grew to about three hundred by the mid-century. One must understand that the attitudes towards the blacks that came to Virginia were not inevitable. This is a very important point to note when understanding how the free blacks came to be they way they were in Northampton, Virginia. It is not specifically known how Anthony Johnson came to own his â€Å"modest estate† or how he ended up in Northampton. Historians believe that his former master, Rirchard Bennett,...

Antigone Essay

Remember those people who always thought they were right, and they always ended up in trouble for it? I Sophocles’ play Antigone, the main characters Antigone and Creon show how being so hubris can be tragic to your life. Set back in ancient Greece an epic battle takes place and brothers end up killing each other. One was allowed a proper burial, yet Polyinesis was not. Antigone felt disappointed by this and decided to bury them yet Creon the newly appointed king did not appreciate the rule breaking. Due to the fact that Antigone and creon exhibited excessive pride, their lives were ruined. Antigone’s arrogance and brashness ultimately led to her death. For example, on Creon’s first day as king he made a decree that no one should bury Polyneisis body. When Antigone heard this, she went to Ismene and asked for her help; yet Ismene refused and called her a criminal. Antigone still disagreed, â€Å"But I will bury him; and if I must die, I say that this crime is holy; I shall lie down with him in death†(673,55-57) This proved that Antigone was cocky and she was sort of stating that all her wrong doings are â€Å"holy†; she is referring to herself as always being right. This affected her though distorting her view on life. In addition to her argument with Ismene, Antigone then was caught in the act of burying Polyniesis and was brought in and questioned by Creon. â€Å"And you Antigone, with your head hanging – do you confess this thing†(679, 53) When Antigone didn’t deny her crime and boasted to the king and the elders, It proves how narcissistic that she is. If she would have not been so boastful I doubt that Croen would have been so harsh to Antigone. Furthermore, Creon then calls in Ismene to protest against her crime as well. Creon started o believe that she helped Antigone to plot against him. Ismene then lied and said she did help to Antigone’s surprise. Antigone become outraged and denied her hand in the deed. Ismene is displeased in antigone’s punishment, â€Å"Do you refuse me, Antigone? I want to die with you; I too have a duty that I must discharge to the dead†(681, 138). Antigone was then enraged further and rebelled against Ismene, â€Å"You shall not lessen my death by sharing it†(681, 139) Antigone is showing self centered and concided she was. She believed that she was so important because she did the right thing by the gods that no one should die except her because she was special. However, Antigone was not the only major character with this flaw. This proves how arrogance can really damage anyone’s life just like it did to Antigone and Creons’. Pride and the excess of it played a big role in this play, being the tragic flaw of both main characters; arrogance is not only a big part of this play but also our history, there will always be people who can never be wrong. Many people are just like Creon and Antigone, Always thinking they are right. Is your life headed for a fate just like Antigone’s plot?

Should the English Police Use Firearms

Should the English police carry and use firearms? This essay explores the debate whether the English police carry and use firearms? It is a debate that has been a focal point in the public, policing agency, government and political arenas since the formation of the police. The English police are well known for their ‘unarmed’ tactic of policing and are only a few police forces worldwide that do so. It was this model of policing that Sir Robert Peel tried to distill from when he first formed the Metropolitan Police back in 1829, which as England as a country keeps to its traditions.However, due to increase in gun crime and terrorist attacks it is perhaps maybe time that the English police force kept up with an ever sophisticated and armed criminal/terrorist. In this essay the main themes I will focus on will be the background of the police, British models of policing, for and against armed response and the level of gun crime in the UK. The term ‘police’ deriv ed from the Greek word ‘politeia’ meaning government or state. ‘Police’ refers to a social institution that most modern societies have to ensure social control.In modern society there is an ideological assumption that the police are a fundamental part of social control and without them there would be chaos (Reiner 2000, p1), however not every society has existed with a formal police force. The role of the police in its efforts for the control of crime and maintaining order is one that has changed through history and is an area of great debate in their effectiveness and the functions the police have in modern society.The police in modern society are called upon routinely to perform a wide range of tasks from public reassurance to terrorism and respond to emergencies, critical incidents and crises, many with an element of social conflict (Grieve et al. 2007, p19). A state run police organisation is a modern form of ‘policing’ (Reiner 2000,p2), ho wever ‘policing’ is a different idea to that of the ‘police’. Understanding the function and role of the police requires consideration to the ideology of policing.The concept of policing can be defined as ‘the function of maintaining social control in society’ (Reiner 2000, p3). Policing can be carried out by an array of people and techniques of which the modern idea of the police is one. The police as a specialised institution of social control are seen as a product of the division of labour in modern societies and can be distinguished from other types of policing by their ability to use legitimate force.In modern democracy the police are both the symbolic ‘front’ of the state’s authority and responsible for the protecting individual and collective freedoms (Neyroud & Beckley 2008, p21). In the UK policing is seen to be ‘by consent’ rather than a state run military model, thus its success is dependent on public co-operation and approval than fear (Grieve et. al 2007, p19). The English police force is only a number of police forces in the world were firearms are not routinely carried by all officers.It has kept in accordance to when they were first formed in 1829 by Sir Robert Peel, after the Metropolitan Police Act was passed by parliament. Upon the forming of on Metropolitan police force (1829), Sir Robert Peel’s intention was that the police’s role was for the prevention of crime. Efforts were made so that the new police did not look like soldiers, where Sir Robert Peel tried to avoid accusations of setting up a continental system of ‘agents’ like the French model of policing.The police weaponry was limited to a wooden truncheon, though cutlasses were available for emergencies and for patrolling dangerous beats and inspectors and above could carry pocket pistols (Emsley 1996, p26). The decision not to arm the Metropolitan Police in 1829 was intentional. The us e of force used by the police was only to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient.The aim was to convey ‘civilian’ status (a citizen in uniform), distancing the police from the military. Sir Robert Peel in his model of the Metropolitan police implemented that the police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.The days of the ‘local bobby on the beat’ and that of a civilian in clothing seemed to be a past time view of the police force by the 1960s. A new system of policing emerged, encouraged by the Home Office, which saw the number of officers on foot and put more into cars. This new system of policing was called ‘unit beat patrol’ (UBP), together with personal radios issued to all officers to enable quicker responses and cover more area (Newburn 2008, p91). This new ystem of policing intended to improve policing and police-community relations, yet it was seen to have the adverse effects. The UBP saw changes not only to the style of policing but also the image, as Chiball (1977) described it: ‘The â€Å"British bobby’’ was recast as the tough, dashing, formidable (but still brave and honest) â€Å"Crime-Buster† (cited in Newburn 2008, p91). However, the most notably change was the model of policing, it had seemed that the original ‘democratic’ model had been replaced by a ‘military’ model of policing.A new trend of hard-liner policing of political and industrial conflict emerged as serious disorder develop in England in the 1970s to 1980s. New fo rces within the police force were developed, specially trained, readily mobile to cope with riots with the formation of The Metropolitan Police Special Patrol Group in 1965. This was a mobile reserve, developed with a paramilitary role in dealing with public order and terrorism (Reiner 2000, p67). All forces produced similar units which were trained in riot control and use of firearms.The military model of policing was ever present during the miners’ strikes of the 1980s, where the police now using centrally co-ordinated police operations and officers were now routinely using riot shields, helmets with visors and long batons in public disorders and riots. The use of force by the police had reached new levels as police used new tactics to ‘disperse and/or incapacitate’ protestors, outlined from the Tactical Options Manual approved by the Home Secretary in 1983 (Emsley 1996, p184).Plastic bullets and CS gas were more commonly deployed and even used in public disord er and riots with the showing of a police force more readily and willing to use excessive force against the public. However, it was common for complaints to be made regarding excessive force by the police but only to be dismissed due to the structure of the complaints system and the legitimacy issues in accountability of the police of use of force.It is evident that the use of force by the police over time has increased and also changed as has the model of policing, tactics, technology and weaponry available to the police. However, what weapons are available to the police and how they use is a topic of public concern and often political controversy. The legal use of force, the Criminal Justice Act 1967 section 3, states the ‘any person may use such force as is a reasonable in the circumstances’ for the lawful purposes. Article 2 of the European Convention amends this provision to equire that the use of lethal force by police officers should be necessary and proportionat e (Newburn 2008, p468). With the emergence of guns more readily available and used by the police, it is only necessary that such overseeing bodies like The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) are formed. Established in 1942, the ACPO function is an independent professionally led body with the aim of centralising the development of policing strategies as a whole (Grieve 2007, p27).In the ‘Manual of Guidance on the Management, Command and Deployment of Armed Officers (2010) the guidelines for using lethal force are as stated in Article 4: ‘Law enforcement officials, in carrying out their duty, shall, as far as possible, apply nonviolent means before resorting to the use of firearms. They may use force and firearms only if other means remain ineffective or without any promise of achieving intended results’†¦Article 5 states: ‘Exercise and restraint in such use and act in proportion to the seriousness of the offence and legitimate objective achieved ’.Consequently, in the UK, police officers are given the discretion to determine if the suspect poses a threat to the police officer or the public as PACE does not actually define what is ‘reasonable force’. In the pursuit of these suspects, police officers are given the power to use deadly force through probable cause of harm. The courts decide whether the use of deadly force is justified or not and in some cases, police officers are charged because their use of deadly force is considered to be unjustifiable. Hence, there is a very thin line separating the justification of the use of deadly force from an act that is unjustified.The ethical and moral dilemma of police officers therefore rests not only on the regulations of their agency but on their analytical and ethical decision. In 2008/09, there were 6,868 authorised firearms officers within the police force which was made up of 136,365 (Home Office, 2010). This is a small minority of police officers who are t rained and authorised to use firearms but when considering that the English police are seen as an ‘unarmed’ force, these numbers are quite high. A debate of great concern for the public but also crime agencies and political arenas, is whether English police officers should carry and use firearms?The increasing use of guns by criminals and gun related deaths to both the public and English police officers has been a catalyst for supporters in the carrying and use of firearms by police officers. The 1960s was seen as the turning point in the arming of police officers as in Shepard’s Bush, London, three plain clothed police officers were shot dead (Newburn 2008, p473). This incident prompted the creation of the Metropolitan Police’s ‘D11’ which trained officers on firearms. However, even with the creation and training of police armed response teams such methods proved inadequate to deal with incidents like the Hungerford massacre.Michael Ryan beca me Britain’s first spree killer (Squires & Kennison 2010 p77), when he killed 16 people. The Thames Valley Police Tactical Arms Firearms team was 40 miles away and took an hour and forty minutes to assemble; this resulted in the debate about the effectiveness of having specific armed response teams and not a general armed police force that could deal with situations more effectively and quicker. In outlining the history of the UK police force Neyroud & Beckley (2008) argues that the baton-days prior 1980s was not enough to protect public safety against criminals.He cites the case of the Hungerford Shootings and the Thames Valley Police Force where an armed man killed two persons and injured one after a random shooting. The police force was heavily criticised because of the length of time it took for the police officers to respond to calls. The police was also criticised because the police use of firearms was largely focused on protecting the safety of the officers and on prev enting fatal shootings, instead of focusing on public safety. Since then, the public expectations of the police and the use of force has been a dilemma for the UK police.Following the shootings, there was a call for more aggressive approach to enforcing the law. Is the use of deadly force justified? For the Thames Valley Police it is justified because it protects not only the police officers but also public security (Neyroud & Beckley, 2008, p253). Security threats cannot be allowed in a society since they affect the confidence of the public on the police. In the terms of consequentialism, shooting a person who is out to massacre innocent is justified because the death of the criminal would mean sparing the lives of many others, restoring the peace and order needed by the society to properly function.The arming of police officers routinely could be considered a small step, as police officers are routinely armed already in a variety of situations, e. g. at airports and when providing security for political leaders or institutions. Already rapid-response units of armed officers are available to deal with armed criminals, but these need to be specially summoned and authorised which consumes time and lead to being ineffective in the situation. Armed police can be seen to reassure law-abiding citizens at a time when gun-related crime is increasing in most European countries and parts of North America.Much public opinion holds that something must be done to tackle this. People may feel safer when they see armed police, especially if they perceive them as a response to a heightened risk. Thus, for example, police officers at British airports and places government buildings routinely carry guns after recent terrorist attacks on England. Just as quickly as incidents brought about a feeling of approving by many of the carrying and use of firearms with deaths of police officers and public, it brought about incidents that gave the disapproval.Having armed police response may have its benefits when dealing with armed and dangerous criminals or terrorist threats; however the problem faced by armed police officers is knowing how much of a threat that suspect really poses and if they are correctly identified as carrying firearms or even the correct suspect. A notably example of these problems faced by armed response police, was the Harry Stanley shooting in 1999. The police received a call that a man believed to be Irish was armed with a shotgun and an armed response team was dispatched to deal with the situation.Upon arriving at the pub the armed response team shouted to Mr Stanley and as he turned the officers took this action as an aim at them with the suspected gun and in response shot him dead. It was revealed that Harry Stewart was in fact carrying a wooden chair leg and posed no threat at all to police officers or the public. However, it was not only the wrongful killing of Harry Stuart that was scrutinised but the events of the incident told by the police officers as it did not match forensic evidence (Squires & Kennison 2010, p172).A similar incident again highlighted the problems faced with armed police officers, the shooting of Jeans Charles de Menezes in 2005. Two weeks after the London bombings, Jean Charles de Menezes was followed by a surveillance team who had mistaken him for Hussain Osman, a suspected failed suicide bomber from the previous day. As Jean Charles de Menezes boarded a train at Stockwell train station he was confronted by anti-terrorism officers who shot him seven times, certain that he was a suicide bomber (O’Driscoll 2008, p341).Initially, a discernible reluctance to accuse the acting officers of any wrongdoing. On the contrary, there was a general acceptance that their actions were both defensible and consistent with Metropolitan Police procedures for dealing with suspected suicide bombers. Viewed in this light, the shooting of Menezes was an unfortunate mistake, but nothing more. The war on terror, it is claimed, presents a novel form of war that necessitates (and therefore legitimates) a robust engagement from the relevant security forces (O’Driscoll 2008, p342).Yet this simple formulation overlooks the possibility that it was the very conditions of the war on terror that gave rise to the circumstances where such a ‘mistake’ could occur. Police violence, according to Box (1983), tends to increase in proportion to the elite’s fear of disorder, and the more fearful the elite, the more likely they are to tolerate illegal violence against potentially dangerous groups (Belur 2010, p323). Thus, in societies with extremely unequal social structures, such as those in some Latin American countries, the fate of the socially marginal is regarded with indifference by the state and the middle-class public alike.Even in strong democracies like the United Kingdom, Jefferson (1990) found that dehumanization and demonization of dissident and marginal groups seek to construct an ‘authoritarian consensus’ among the ‘respectable majority’, which allows them and the government to authorize or condone certain coercive measures (cited Belur 2010, p324). For the debate whether English police officers should carry and use firearms, it is important to look at the statistics of gun crime in England as an indication on the severity of the problem for a justification.There has been a dramatic rise in the ‘street gang’ culture within the UK, characterised by illegal gun ownership and violence (Caddick & Porter 2011, p1). A new wave of gun crime has contributed to the so called ‘gun culture’ that many of the UK’s youths participate in, despite a background of increasingly restrictive legislations and better policy responses. There were 53 fatal police shootings between 1990 and 2011 (Inquest 2011). The figures for fatal shootings might be deemed ‘low’, however the police in Eng land have an international reputation for being ‘unarmed’.Overall, there were 19,951 police operations in 2008/09 in which a firearm was authorised. The overall level of gun crime in England and Wales is very low – less than 0. 5% of all recorded crime. In 2007/8 there were 9,865 offences in England and Wales in which firearms (excluding air weapons) were reportedly used, a 2% increase on the previous year. In 2007/8 there were 455 firearm offences in which there was a fatal or serious injury, 3% lower than in 2006/07. 6. 8% of all homicides committed during 2007/08 involved the use of firearms, down from 7. 8% in 2006/07 (Home Office (2010).Sir Robert Peel back in 1829, formed the Metropolitan Police with the aim to convey ‘civilian’ status (a citizen in uniform), distancing the police from the military. Sir Robert Peel in his model of the Metropolitan police implemented that the police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public t hat gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.There have been a number of major changes to the police force as well as in technology and weaponry which is certainly a necessary solution to new problems faced by the police from criminals. However, there is a reason why as early as 1829, English police officers have remained unarmed. Arming the police is an easy way of ignoring the fundamental failures of society. Guns are not a response to crime. What is actually needed is more effort in preventing crime through detective work and policing strategy rather than focussing on responding to it.Nor does arming the police offer a solution to fundamental socio-political issues which contribute to crime. Routinely arming the police is an uneven respons e to gun crime, as it will affect some sections of the community more than others. For example, as certain ethnic groups are often associated with particular types of criminality, police use of firearms will damage police credibility within communities which feel that they are the subject of too much police suspicion. Even if the police believe they are carrying weapons in self-defence, others will view it as an aggressive act.This is a big change, both culturally and practically. The large majority of policemen and women go through their whole career without handling firearms. Even with the special selection measures and intensive training given to the few firearms officers today, mistakes sometimes occur and innocent people are shot, either by mistake because the armed officers are acting on inaccurate information, or because they are bystanders caught in the cross-fire of a shoot-out. Arming all police officers would mean ditching the current stringent selection methods and inevi tably result in less training being rovided, so mistakes would become much more common and more people would be wounded or killed. If the English police officer has managed to last from 1829 from its first formation without carrying and using firearms then it does not need them now. The current responses in place to terrorist and armed criminals in place are sufficient; although not perfect by any means it would be a devastating blow for the people of England tradition and the effects costly. There are enough replacements to the use of firearms and those options should be explored. References Belur, J. (2010). Why do Police Use Deadly Force?Explaining Police Encounters in Mumbai. British Journal pf Criminology. 50 (5), p320-341. Caddick, A & Porter, E. (2011). Exploring a model of professionalism in multiple perpetrator violent gun crime in the UK. Criminology & Criminal Justice. 1-22. Emsley, C (1996). The English Police: A Political and Social History. Essex: Pearson. Grieve, J et al. (2007). Policing. London: Sage Publications Hallsworth, S & Silverstone, D. (2009). ‘That’s life innit’ A British perspective on guns, crime and social order. Criminal & Criminal Justice. 9 (3), p359-377. Leishman, F & Loveday, B & Savage, S (2000).Core Issue In Policing. 2nd ed. Essex: Pearson. Lutterbeck, D. (2004). Between Police and Military:The New Security Agenda and the Rise of Gendarmeries. Cooperation and Conflict. 39 (45), p45-68. Malcolm, J (2002). Guns and Violence: The English Experience. London: Harvard University Press. McLaughlin, E (2007). The New Policing. London: Sage Publications. Mitchell, L & Flin, R. (2007). Shooting Decisions by Police Firearms Officers. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making,. 1 (4), p375-390. Newburn, T (2008). Handbook of Policing. 2nd ed. Devon: Willian Publishing. Newburn, T (2005).Policing: Key Readings. Oxon: Routledge. Neyroud, P and Beckley, A (2008). Policing, Ethics and Human Rights. 2nd ed. D evon: Willian Publishing. O'Driscoll, C. (2008). Fear and Trust: The Shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes and the War on Terror. Journal of International Studies. 36 (2), p339-360. Reiner, R (2000). The Politics of Policing. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sharp, D. (2005). Who Needs Theories in Policing? An Introduction to a Special Issue on Policing. The Howard Journal. 44 (5), p449-459. Squires, P ; Kennison, P (2010). Shooting to Kill. Sussex: Wiley ; Sons Ltd.

Coboalt essays

Coboalt essays Cobalt My report is about the element Cobalt. Cobalt is the 27th element on the periodical table and has an atomic number of twenty-seven. It has a symbol of Co. Cobalt ¹s atomic weight is 58.9332. It has a melting point of 1,490Ã… ¡ C. and a boiling point of 2,900Ã… ¡ C. Cobalt looks almost exactly like iron and nickel. Cobalt is between iron and nickel on the periodical table and found in only . 001-.002 percent of the earth ¹s crust. Cobalt was first found in the Harz Mountains. People in the silver mines dug up arsenic cobalt ores. Then, because they thought the ores contained copper, heated the ores releasing arsenic trioxides. Cobalt was named after the German kobold. A kobold was said to be an underground goblin or demon. In 1735 cobalt was identified. Cobalt is a white metal with a bluish cast. It is magnetic and very hard and does not tarnish. Cobalt has many uses and I will talk about some of them. It is a very expensive metal that is used in the manufacture of very ma ny expensive alloys. Cobalt-iron alloys have very unique and special magnetic properties. For example, Hyperco is used as the nucleus in strong electromagnets. Alloys containing titanium, aluminum, cobalt and nickel can be made to become permanently magnetic. One alloy, called Stellite, is an alloy of cobalt, chromium, tungsten, and molybdenum. This alloy is extremely hard and keeps its hardness at extreme temperatures. It has many uses: cutting tools are made of it along with gas turbines. Zaire is the world ¹s largest producer of cobalt with 65% of the world ¹s reserve. Cobalt is a common trace element found in food. It is a component of vitamin B12. It is important to our health. But excessive amounts may cause nausea, damage to the heart, kidneys, and nerves, and even cause death. I think that Cobalt is a neat element. Before I did this report I knew nothing of Cobalt. Now I know how they use it as an alloy and in other ways. ...

Breakdown of Every Question Type in SAT Reading by %

Breakdown of Every Question Type in SAT Reading by % SAT / ACT Prep Online Guides and Tips Passage-based questions on the SAT Critical Reading section can be a real challenge, so it’s helpful to know exactly what you’re getting into before the test. I’ve gone through every publicly available SAT and analyzed how frequently every type of Reading question shows up on the exam. In this article, which has been fully updated for the new SAT, I’ll go over the different categories of questions, show you how frequently they each appear, and tell you what this information means for your testing strategy. What are the SAT Reading Question Types? On the SAT, the Reading section lasts 65 minutes and contains 52 questions. There will be five passages in the section, and all Reading questions are based on the passages. Before we get to the distribution of questions, I’ll briefly outline each of the nine question types you'll see on the SAT Reading section so you have a better context for the numbers. Big Picture Questions Big picture questions are about the author’s point of view, the primary purpose of the passage, and the rhetorical strategy of the author. Example of a big picture question: The primary purpose of the passage is to A. discuss the assumptions and reasoning behind a theoryB. describe the aim, method, and results of an experimentC. present and analyze conflicting data about a phenomenonD. show the innovative nature of a procedure used in a study Little Picture/Detail Questions Little picture/detail questions will be about a specific small detail in a passage.They might ask you what a phrase in a passage specifically refers to or give you a line number and ask you to find a detail in that part of the passage. Example of a little picture question: The fourth paragraph (lines 50-56) indicates that Plato’s principal objection to â€Å"poetry† (line 50) was its A. confusing languageB. widespread popularityC. depiction of turbulent eventsD. influence on people’s morals Inference Questions Inference questions will ask you to make a logical assumption based on details in the passage.You may have to infer the meaning of a paragraph or line in the passage, determine the implications of a statement in the passage, or make a logical conclusion about opinions stated by passage authors. Example of an inference question: Which of the following, if available, would best refute the author’s assertion about the â€Å"young upstart† (line 57)? A. Evidence that certain kinds of particles in nature exceed the speed of lightB. Confirmation of conditions that existed in the earliest stages of the Big BangC. Speculation that the deep interior of a black hole is not as dense as scientists have believedD. Mathematical formulas that link general relativity and quantum mechanics in the same realm Function Questions Function questions will ask you to figure out what the purpose or effect of a line or paragraph is in the context of a passage or why the author used a certain phrasing in the passage. Example of a function question: The author of the passage uses the quotation in lines 5-6 primarily as a: A. vivid expression of how she views wordsB. powerful example of what she sought in ShakespeareC. scholarly citation linking her to poetic wordsD. comical introduction to a problem encountered by every dramatic performer Vocabulary in Context Questions Words in context questions will ask you the definition of a word as it is used in the context of a passage.Answering these questions correctly requires an understanding of nuance in the meanings of common words rather than a wide-ranging vocabulary. Example of a vocabulary in context question: In line 34, the word â€Å"follow† most nearly means A. pursueB. resultC. join inD. listen carefully Analogy Questions Analogy questions will ask you to make a comparison between a condition or relationship described in the passage and a condition or relationship that is not mentioned in the passage.Basically, you have to detect the underlying similarity between something in the passage and a separate hypothetical situation.Analogy questions are a subset of inference questions. Example of an analogy question: The â€Å"experts† (line 53) would most likely argue that which of the following is guilty of the â€Å"sin† mentioned in line 58? A. A veterinarian who is unwilling to treat a sick animalB. A cat owner who believes his cat misses its siblingsC. A dog owner who is unwilling to punish her dog for misbehavingD. A zoologist who places the interests of people before those of animals Author Technique Questions Author technique questions will ask you about the author’s tone in the passage or the mood the passage conveys to the reader. Example of an author technique question: The first paragraph of the passage establishes a mood of A. jaded dismissalB. nervous apprehensionC. dramatic anticipationD. initial concern Evidence Support Questions These are a new type of SAT Reading question. You'll answer a question about the passage, for example an inference or little detail question, and the next question (the evidence support question) will ask you tocite evidencethat supports your answer to the previous question. Example of an evidence support question: Which choice provides the best evidence for the answer to the previous question? A.Lines 45-50 ("So every...beetles")B.Lines 51-53 ("Finally...beetles")C.Lines 59-61 ("We would...open")D.Lines 76-79 ("Gourds...flowers") Data Reasoning Questions For the first time, SAT Reading now includes figures (such as graphs and charts) that show data. For data reasoning questions, you'll need to interpret the data in the figure and place it in the context of the overall passage - for example, how does this figure support the author's argument?Especially tricky will be data reasoning questions that require you to make inferences- for example, "the author is most likely to support which interpretation of the data in this figure?" Example of a data reasoning question: According to figure 1, in 2017, the cost of which of the following fuels is projected to be closest to the 2009 US average electricity cost shown in figure 2? A.Natural gasB.Wind (onshore)C.Conventional coalD.Advanced nuclear Now for our all-access behind-the-scenes tour of SAT reading. This is where the magic happens, folks. Currently in production: "SAT Reading: This Time, It's Critical" Distribution of Question Types Here's a table that outlines the distribution of each question type that we found on the SAT Reading section. This data was collected by going through every Reading question on the eight available official practice SATs, sorting them into categories, and averaging the data we got. Question Type Average Number of Questions per Section Percentage of Total Reading Questions Big Picture 21% Little Detail 7 13% Inference 5 10% Function 5 10% Vocabulary in Context 8 15% Analogy 1 2% Author Technique 1 2% Evidence Support 10 20% Data Reasoning 5 10% All Critical Reading Questions 52 103%(due to rounding) Big Picture Questions Out of the 52 questions on the SAT Reading section, I found that an average of about questions per test were Big Picture questions. This makes them the most common type of Reading question, and it means that about21% of the questions you’ll encounter on SAT Critical Reading will be based on an understanding of the main points of passages.The SAT has more Big Picture questions than the ACT, so this can make the SAT Reading section a bit more challenging because you really need to be aware of what the passage is discussing and what the auther is trying to convey. Little Detail Questions Little detail questions are also pretty common on the SAT, with an average of 7 questions per test.This means that about 13% of the questions in the Critical Reading section will be comprised of little detail questions.These questions tend to be the most direct and the least challenging of the bunch, so it’s encouraging to know that they are so common. Inference Questions At an average of 5 questions per test, inference questions are somewhat common and make up about 10% ofquestions on the Critical Reading section.This means that inference skills are pretty important on the SAT. This is especially true since they come into play on other question types, like analogies and sometimes big picture questions, as well. Function Questions There are also about 5 function questions per test,and they make up about10% of Reading questions.This means it's going to be important to understand the structure of the passages and the reasons behind the author's phrasing. Want to learn more about the SAT but tired of reading blog articles? Then you'll love our free, SAT prep livestreams. Designed and led by PrepScholar SAT experts, these live video events are a great resource for students and parents looking to learn more about the SAT and SAT prep. Click on the button below to register for one of our livestreams today! Vocabulary in Context Questions Vocabulary in context questions became much more common when the SAT was revised in 2016. Now, there are about 8 of these questions per test, and they make up around 15% of Reading questions.As we mentioned above, you don't need a huge vocabulary to get these questions right, but you do need to be familiar with different definitions of more common words and how to determine which definition is being used based on the word's context in the passage. Analogy Questions Analogy questions are very rare - you can expect 1 or maybe 2 of them per test.If your skills with inference questions are strong, you should be able to figure out analogy questions as well.It's still good to be prepared for analogy questions because they are kind of weird if you haven't seen them before. See my article on analogy questions for more information about how to solve them. Author Technique Questions Author technique questions are even rarer than analogy questions. They only come up about once per test, if at all.It is sometimes useful to understand tone and mood for the Critical Reading section even if you don’t come across a specific question about them, but these are clearly not core concepts on the test. Evidence Support Questions Evidence support (also known as command of evidence) questions are one of the new SAT Reading questions, and they're also one of the most common question types. You can expect to see about 10 evidence support questionson each Reading Section, which means they make up about 20%of SAT Reading questions.To answer these questions correctly, you'll need to be able to use higher-level reasoning skills to correctly select the part of the passage that supports your previous answer. Data Reasoning Questions Another new question type, there will be about5 data reasoning questions on the SAT, usually spread between two passages. This means they make up about10% of the Reading section.To answer these questions correctly, you'll need to be able to accurately read graphs and charts and be able to understand how they relate to the passage. For more in-depth information, check out our guide to data reasoning questions. I got a blank space baby, and I'll write your name - a philosophy that probably didn't get TSwift very far on the SAT. How Does This Information Affect Your Approach to SAT Reading? Now that you know the frequency of question types, you may be wondering how you can adapt your Critical Reading strategy to the composition of the test. Here are some tips you should consider based on the data: Read Strategically It’s important to come up with a passage reading strategy that will allow you to absorb details while also understanding the main points the author of the passage is making.Since a significant portion of questions in Critical Reading are big picture, it is especially critical to understand passages holistically. On the SAT, passages are relatively short, so it can be beneficial to skim them before reading the questions.Even though Reading questions often give you line numbers, it's a lot easier to figure out questions that deal with inferences, the function of a certain part of the passage, and the main purpose of the passage if you read the passage quickly beforehand.A good skimming strategy is to read the first and last paragraphs and the first and last sentences of each body paragraph.This way you’ll know the main ideas and the gist of the author’s argument. Inference, function, and big picture questions together make up nearly half of the Reading questions on the test.This means that fully understanding the main points made in the passage before you read the questions will help you to answer them much more efficiently. Pay Attention to Details Little picture questions make up a significant part of Reading questions, so you should also be prepared to get very specific with your answers.Sometimes the questions students miss are the ones that seem easy. They’ll breeze right by them and make a silly mistake.Don’t let that happen to you! This is also important because inference skills are critical on the test.With most inference questions, it comes down to finding the right keywords in the passage and matching up details to draw conclusions.This requires an eye for small details as well as awareness of the overall structure of the passage. Don’t Worry About Rarer Question Types (Unless You’re Shooting for a Perfect Score) If analogies scare you (and they are some of the more difficult questions), don’t worry too much about them. The same goes for author technique questions.You don’t need to spend your time practicing question types that will likely only show up once or twice on the test if at all. Practice answering big picture, little detail, evidence support, and vocabulary in context questions first and foremost. Then, if you master those, you can work through the rarer question types. Some questions are rare birds. But mainly I just think the expression on this bird's face is HILARIOUS. Summary There are a few different types of questions that you can expect to see on the passage-based reading section of SAT Critical Reading. These include: Big pictureLittle pictureInferenceFunctionVocabulary in contextAnalogies Author technique Evidence support Data reasoning Big pictureand evidence supportquestions are the most common, followed by vocabulary in contextand little detailquestions. Analogyand author technique questions are relatively rare. Based on the frequency of question types, you should: Practice skimming passages strategically Pay attention to passage details Save the rare question types for last in terms of studying Now that you know exactly what kinds of questions to expect, you’ll be extra prepared for everything the Critical Reading section throws at you! What's Next? For more SAT Reading strategies, take a look at our article on how to improve low reading scores or, if your scores are already high, check out our advice on how to get an 800 on SAT Reading. Read my article on the fundamental rule of SAT reading to understand the core strategy behind answering any reading question and my article on the hardest SAT reading questions to see what you might be up against. Still trying to decide whether to take SAT or ACT Reading? Learn about the differences here. Want to improve your SAT score by 160 points? Check out our best-in-class online SAT prep program. We guarantee your money back if you don't improve your SAT score by 160 points or more. Our program is entirely online, and it customizes what you study to your strengths and weaknesses. If you liked this Reading lesson, you'll love our program.Along with more detailed lessons, you'll get thousands ofpractice problems organized by individual skills so you learn most effectively. We'll also give you a step-by-step program to follow so you'll never be confused about what to study next. Check out our 5-day free trial: