The Continuum from Legitimacy to Fraud Dissertation

The Continuum from Legitimacy to Fraud - Dissertation Example With the purpose of satisfying the data requirements of the proposed study, two types of data collection procedures, which include primary data and secondary data, will be taken into account. The primary method of data collection to be implemented in this proposed study comprises interviews and surveys. In this context, interviews and surveys will be conducted on managers and stakeholders for collecting primary data in this proposed study. On the other hand, the secondary data planned to be collected from various secondary sources in this proposed study will include journals, books, and other online sources. This proposed research will emphasize the study of earning management. Earning management is identified as a practice executed by managers to modify the financial stance of the earning entity, depicting misrepresented financial information during the unsatisfactory performance of a company. In this respect, the proposed study will be executed with the aim of determining the vario us differences and linkages amid earning management and fraud. In the process to attain the determined aim, the proposed study will depict the dimensions and aspects of earning management. Accordingly, a quantitative research approach will be adopted on the basis of which, the data collected will be analyzed with charts and graphs. It is expected that from the findings of the proposed study, the procedure on the basis of which earning management leads to fraudulent practices can be revealed evidently.... On the other hand, fraud is unaccepted under the principles of GAAP being explained as the procedure of misrepresenting data and information presented to stakeholders and investors of the company. Kassem (2012) contextually stated that earning management may be accepted under the principles of GAAP, but it may affect stock price as well as integrity of a company leading to non-transparency of financial information. As stated by Kassem (2012), management of a company may adopt earning management in providing misrepresented financial information in order to misguide stakeholders and investors during the failure of the company (Tangjitprom, 2013; Kassem, 2012). Earning Management is a form of Fraud According to Leuz, Nanda & Wysocki (2003), earning management is used by management of a company to adopt fraudulent practices for their benefits at the expense of stakeholders’, investors’ and others’ interests who are dependable on the performance of the company. In thi s perspective, when stakeholders and investors detect that management of a company has adopted earning management, the stakeholders are eligible to take adequate disciplinary and legal measures against the occurrence of the mismanagement (Leuz, Nanda & Wysocki, 2003). In a similar perspective, Saanoun, Riahi & Arab (2013) have stated that managers may be adopting earning management in order to obtain private benefits and revealing false financial information and reports to stakeholders and investors. Correspondingly, earning management is recognized as an unethical practice in business by stakeholders and investors, which can certainly hamper the confidence of stakeholders and investors among others to a significant extent (Saanoun, Riahi & Arab,

Books especially Great Expectations Essay Example for Free

Books especially Great Expectations Essay Pip is very childlike the way Dickens describes him, almost naive and he has a large imagination.Dickens shows Pips naivety by telling the reader Pip believes his mothers name was also Georgina as that was written on the gravestone.  Pip is introduced when he is at the graveyard.  Dickens aims for the readers empathy by telling us that five of his siblings are dead and buried with his mother and father.  The historical context Dickens used was that in the 1800s children died young.   Then we are introduced to the criminal who we later learn is called Abel Magwitch. When Pip meets the convict he is in irons, rags and is hungry.  Dickens showed us this man was of lower class by the way he spoke and the fact his did not wear a hat like gentlemen did.  A man with no hat, and broken shoes.  Abel comes off as a scary man however once he has food and a file for his irons, his attitude changes.  Dickens tries to get sympathy for Abel by the way he describes him as having a limp and using his arms to warm himself up as well holding himself together. Estella is introduced in chapter eight.  Estella is the adopted daughter of Miss Havisham; Estella was brought up to hate men by Miss. Havisham.  This causes Estella to poke fun at many aspects of Pip.  She has been taught well like most upper class children and Dickens shows this by her speech and appearance.  Dont be ridiculous boy, she believes herself to be higher and more important than Pip due to her being of a higher class.  Miss. Havisham was a wealthy woman who got jilted at the alter, her life went down hill from there as if she was stuck in the time.  We can see that from the way Dickens describes the way her house was decorated.  Dickens makes Miss. Havisham come over as a bitter spiteful lady by using her speech and actions. Sometimes I have sick fantasies. She went on.  The Setting.  The first chapter is set in a graveyard which gives the reader an eerie yet calm feeling until the convict appears changing the atmosphere to dramatic.  Dickens uses words like overgrown, forgotten and bleak to create the sense of setting and atmosphere.  He then goes to use words like terrible and fearful to fit into the new dramatic setting.  Towards the end of chapter one, Dickens uses nearly a full paragraph on just describing the setting. sky was just a row of long angry, red lines and black lines intermixed.   This gives off a rather calming yet suspenseful atmosphere. Chapter eight is started with a strong sense of suspense and curiosity, the setting and atmosphere being both questionable and fearful.  Dickens uses words like scornful, dark and uncomfortable to successfully create an atmosphere; he describes Miss. Havisham as almost skeleton like then he continues to actually have Pip compare her to a wax skeleton.  Dickens uses words like hollow eyes, faded skin and very slim to get his point across.When comparing the two settings they are very similar by that way they are both set in a dark settings and suspenseful atmospheres.   The storyline. The entire book is mainly focussed around Pips days and his meeting of new people in both different classes.  Chapter one is focussed on Pip meeting the convict, who is of a lower class and then chapter eight is focussed on Pip meeting Estella and Miss. Havisham who are of a higher class.  The story is about Pip and his feelings when he meets each of these people as well as the expectations he has for himself once meeting those people.  Pip tries to raise his expectations for himself once hes met Estella. Dickens chooses everything carefully when writing a storyline, like names for instance he describes calling upon Estella in chapter eight as her light came along the dark passage like a star. Estella is actually Latin for star so you can tell he chose the name wisely as well as fitting historical context into the chapter.  He also uses pat experiences to help write about events in his books especially Great Expectations.

How Americans Were Seduced By Annexation Of Hawaii History Essay

How Americans Were Seduced By Annexation Of Hawaii History Essay In the title of this paper, I am making an overt reference to a recent publication of Dr. Andrew J. Bacevich, retired US Army colonel and professor of History and International Relations at Boston University. In this title, Bacevich provided a contemporary analysis of the roots of militarism in American society, and the over reliance that America places of its military capabilities when it comes to world affairs. It may seem odd at first, but Americas eponymous militarism and its current experiences in the current Global War on Terror have direct parallels with the US involvement in the 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom. The US involvement in the forcible removal of the Kingdoms sovereignty has been described as Americas first experience with regime change.  [2]  In this paper, I will be documenting how Hawaii was in fact a sovereign nation within the family of nations; a status which changed with the US militarys intervention in the overthrow of the existing government in 1893. I will be framing this military intervention in the context of international laws and the United States own codes on war. In addition, the annexation of the strategically important Hawaii in the context of the impending Spanish American war will be discussed, as it has clear corollaries with the current US oil wars. (Just like the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, Americas participation in the overthrow of Haw aiis sovereignty in 1893 brings up questions of legality regarding international law.) To begin the analysis it is useful to look at the two frames of looking at Hawaii as an entity today: Hawaii as the 50th State In researching this paper, I have gained a new understanding in the history of the Hawaiian Islands, which is very different from the standard narrative which is generally taught. In fact, what is clear is that there are now two distinct narratives that in play when it comes to conceptualizing Hawaii. The first is that Hawaii is the 50th state of the United States of America, having won statehood in 1959. It is an idyllic land of beaches, tiki bars and a haven for surfing and brown girls in hulu skirts. One of the main texts consulted in this research was the Russs The Hawaiian Revolution. This monograph was published in 1959, the year that Hawaii became a US state. This is the authors preface as it succinctly describes how America frames its conception of Hawaii: No commercial company would touch this book because popular appeal is lacking in the pages. It is simply not the kind of book which would ever become a bestseller. Upon submitting a preliminary draft, at his request, to a reader of a New York publishing house, I received the following comment: What the commercial market wants on Hawaii is romance. I cannot quite see how you can appropriately put out this book with a jacket showing a scantily clad brownish maiden and a blurb assuring the reader that he or she might get some pointers as to how sin thrives in Hawaii. And that is what the public wants.    [An interesting aside to this is that this institution has one copy of this book, which was acquired in 1977 and in the intervening 33 years, I am the forth individual to check this item from the library.] Hawaii as a sovereign nation under US occupation In contrast to this way of looking at Hawaii, is to view Hawaii as a sovereign nation which is not a part of the United States and instead has been under illegal occupation since 1893. This is certainly not the way that Hawaii is portrayed in mainstream education and media, but does make sense of and explains the growing Hawaiian sovereignty movement. It is testament to the power and hegemony of the United States that what is in reality a colonial possession is perceived to have ceded its powers voluntarily and become a US state. To understand this narrative of Hawaii is to understand neo-colonialism at work. The United States clearly had a renewed vigour of Manifest Destiny in the late 1800s. At this time there was a push westwards to the Pacific coast, in search of cheaper labor, land and raw materials. Native people impeding this were fought, through the Indian wars all the west to the western coast. At this time there was great interest in the vast market of China and the Orient. Japan was a growing imperial power. The US was gravely concerned with European colonial powers and the nascent Japanese colonial powers influence on China, as this was in large part an untapped market. Hawaii as a military outpost Today Hawaii is one of the most militarized places on earth. It has tens of thousands of troops and more than 150 military installations on the island. More than a third of the land is controlled by the US military. It had become a popular retirement location for military personnel, and real estate prices are several times the national average. It is home to The  United States Pacific Command  (USPACOM), which has responsibility for over half of the worlds surface. The idea of the American military base is a fundamentally symbol of power for the US. A recent count of US military installations across the globe places the number of foreign bases at over 700  [3]  . A US presence in Germany or the detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba are facts of the modern world. In his recent critique of the modern American empire, Chalmers Johnson, seeing these bases as a symbol of empire, draws parallels between the current spread of mid- and large-sized US military bases with those of the British Empire and the Roman Empire at the heights of their powers.  [4]  Given these parallels, it is evident why the label of empire has been applied to the American experience. This notion of empire changed the image of America from within and to the outside world, with the 1898 annexation of Hawaii was an important first step in the creation of this new empire. Fundamental to the US domination of Asia was to have a military outpost far out in the Pacific. In John Hustons WWII documentary Report from the Aleutians he shows a map that illustrates how the Aleutian Islands and the Hawaiian islands were the two strategic outposts from which the Pacific coast of the United States was protected.  [5]  In essence the strategy was to establish naval superiority by bringing the war to them, and have these outposts operating as vanguards against attack. Ernest May emphasizes the shift in Americas foreign policy when it came to the Hawaii question by comparing views expressed about Hawaii with those expressed twenty-odd years earlier about the Dominican republic: As of 1870 they had still seen the United States as an experiment: the only consequential nation without a monarch and a privileged aristocracy, and the only one that attempted to reconcile national and local interests by means of a federal system.  [6]   Central to the debates and discourse that occurred around the 1890s was the Monroe Doctrine from several decades earlier. By the 1890s The Monroe Doctrine of 1823 seemed to offer justification for actions taken involving Hawaii, Cuba, The Philippines, China and Central and South America. Ultimately, the Spanish-American war of 1898 was an important focal point that sharpened attitudes towards how America should approach her role within the wider world. To understand this, it is useful to revisit the Monroe Doctrine of over half a century earlier and to explain why it became so important at the close of the century.   The Monroe Doctrine was declared in a few paragraphs of President James Monroes seventh annual message to Congress on December 2, 1823. Monroe warned European countries not to interfere in the Western Hemisphere, stating that the American continents are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers.  [7]  This made clear to the rest of the world that any such colonization would amount to an act of aggression and would be responded to with force.    The Monroe Doctrine thus became the foundation of future U.S. foreign policy, and it set out to separate the New World from the Old World. Although this Doctrine met with tacit approval from Great Britain, it was not initially taken as seriously as it would be later in the century due to the image at the time of Americas week naval power. Alongside the resurgent interest in the Monroe Doctrine, there also was a movement towards a new Manifest Destiny a phrase normally ascribed to an earlier period of westward territorial expansion. American historian and philosopher John Fiske wrote an influential article in 1885, published in Harpers magazine entitled A New Manifest Destiny. Referring to the frontier against barbarism Fiskes piece which advocated Christianizing and civilizing the barbarians was rapturously received by audiences at the time, on the lecture circuit.  [8]   It is interesting to contrast Fiskes optimistic and expansionist world-view with the prevailing traditionalist American sentiment of isolationism. A prime example of this was in the US restrained response to The Chilean Controversy of 1891. In late 1891 two US sailors on shore leave from the cruiser USS Baltimore in the Chilean port of Valparaà ­so were killed by rebels (who later would form the new post revolution government.) Despite registering his indignation at the attack, President Harrison remained non-confrontational. Responding to this diplomatic incident he states in an internal memo: It has been my desire in every way to cultivate friendly and intimate relationships with all the Governments of this hemisphere. We do not covet their territory.  [9]   President McKinleys future Secretary of State John Sherman in 95 echoed these sentiments when he wrote that he hopes that our people will be content with internal growth, and avoid the complications of foreign acquisitions.  [10]  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   It is in the context of the above tensions between the expansionist and traditionalist mindsets that Hawaii and its intertwinement with the United States came about. The background to the US involvement in Hawaii began with trade treaties cementing a relationship going back a half century based on missionaries and whaling fleets  [11]  . In return for the United States permitting Hawaiian sugar to enter the American market freely, the Hawaiian government agreed not to lease or dispose of any of its territory to any other power. It also lead to the granting to the US of a naval base at Pearl Harbor. Interestingly the Treaty explicitly acknowledged Hawaii as a sovereign state. Overall, however, the effect of this treaty was to dilute the countrys independence and make her dependent on the United States.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   At this point Hawaii was a sovereign independent state the Hawaiian Kingdom and was governed under a single ruler (King David KalÄ kaua.) It had international recognition and had entered into treaties and conventions with the nations of Austria, Belgium, Bremen (presently Germany), Denmark, France, Germany, Hamburg (presently Germany), Italy, Hong Kong (former colony of England), Japan, Netherlands, New South Wales (former colony of England), Portugal, Russia, Samoa, the Swiss Confederation, Sweden, Norway, Tahiti (colony of France), United Kingdom, and the United States of America.  [12]  In 1887, the King was forced to promulgate a new constitution which would drastically reduce his powers and transfer the balance of power to the American, European and Hawaiian elite on the islands. It changed the voting rights of the population and disenfranchised Asians from voting. This came to be known as the Bayonet Constitution as a result of the King being under threat of being deposed by the armed militia and politicians representing the elite what came to be known as the Reform Party. This Party favored annexation with the United States. In the end this led to the permanent cession of Pearl Harbor and its surrounds to the United States. This experience of having a naval military installation in a foreign territory or host country was to be the blueprint for the future expansion of the American Empire. This uneasy alliance continued until 1893 when Queen LiliÊ »uokalani, sister of the King ascended to the throne and went about drafting a new constitution which would restore the monarchys powers. As a reaction to this, elite mostly American residents on the island created a Committee of Safety which had for its purpose the removal of the Queen, and ultimately to cede to the United States through annexation. A provisional government was assembled and a coup dà ©tat took place aided in large part by the presence in Hawaii of a detachment of uniformed US marines who came aboard from their cruiser, the USS Boston which was in Honolulu Harbor at the time. The presence of these armed US soldiered who were there ostensible in a neutral capacity to protect US citizens in Hawaii was sufficiently intimidating for the Queen to surrender, leading to the abolition of the monarchy. What is particularly interesting about this whole episode and ensuing controversy is that it marked a period of introspection and conspicuous concern for the image that America was projecting to the world. President Harrison had favored annexation but when President Cleveland assumed office again in 1993 for his second term (the first term being directly before Harrison) he strongly opposed annexation on moral grounds. In a message to Congress dated December 18, 1893 he states that all things relating to the transaction (the treaty of annexation of Hawaii) should be clear and free from suspicion. He conceded in the same message that the Provisional Government (of Hawaii) owes its existence to an armed invasion by the United States. The tone of this message makes it clear that President Cleveland thought the annexation of the islands to be unconscionable and would impugn the American people and the image of the country internationally.  [13]  In fact President Cleveland ordered an investigation into the overthrow by former Congressman James Henderson Blount.   It was concluded by Blount in 1893 that the United States diplomatic and military representatives had abused their authority and were responsible for the change in government. However, a U.S. Congressional investigation under Senator John Tyler Morgan into the overthrow, one year later cleared the US military of wrongdoing.  [14]  At this point Cleveland changed his position, recognizing the Provisional Government and the nascent Republic of Hawaii. The United States had failed to annex the Hawaiian Islands by treaty. The Hawaiian question remained, and continued to be debated. It could be said that at this point America had to position itself internationally, wrestling with ideas between its traditional moral repugnance at the idea of colonial interference and a growing notion that it should take all outlying territory necessary to (its) own defense.  [15]  That last quotation is attributed to the very influential Henry Cabot Lodge speaking to the US Senate in 1895. In this speech he forewarned of Japanese encroachment of the islands which would cause a threat to the United States.  [16]   Lorrin A. Thurston, leader of the 1893 coup, further pushed the cause for annexation by emphasizing the Japanese threat. He circulated a pamphlet  [17]  in 1897 warning of Japanese immigration to Hawaii and the threat that the huge numbers of arrivals to the islands would pose.   Eventually they would be dominant in numbers and being an energetic, ambition, warlike and progressive people would pose a serious threat. Walter LaFeber summed up the years leading up to this writing:   Ã‚   Jingoistic congressmen, expansionist-minded naval officers, and militant-minded newspaper editors frequently attempted to conjure up the specter of British, Japanese, or even Russian control of these islands.  [18]   The following year in 1898 the new President McKinley was in favor of a Treaty of Annexation, but this failed in the Senate. A congressional joint resolution was obtained this year, and on the authority of this joint resolution Hawaii was annexed, becoming a US territory officially in 1900. This was an important turning point, as effectively this was the first instance of the new American Imperialism. It is also important in that the basis for the annexation was not a treaty but rather a joint resolution (even a treaty of cession by the self-imposed government officials of the Bayonet Constitution would be suspect.) To compare this with today, the United States had as much right to annex Hawaii in 1898 as it has today to annex Iraq or Afghanistan. This is a fundamental point at the heart of the issue the overthrow was illegal under international law. But in the context of the Islands use as an outpost during the 1898 Spanish American war, that is what happened. In his doctoral dissertation on the issue, Dr. Keanu Sai writes Congress could no more annex the Hawaiian Islands in 1898 as a matter of military necessity during the Spanish American war than it could annex Afghanistan today as a matter of military necessity during the American war on terrorism.  [19]  Dr. Sai, who himself served as a US Army officer, gave an example of how Americas involvement in the Hawaiian overthrow would be perceived now. He explained how if he landed in South Korea as a US Army officer without a status of forces agreement or consent by that government, it would be an act of war.  [20]  When the US Marines came ashore in 1898 wielding Gatling guns and Howitzers to protect the insurgents, this was thus an act of war. Military occupation is currently regulated by the Hague and Geneva Conventions, and US Army Field Manual 27-10. Section 358 of this manual states: Occupation Does Not Transfer Sovereignty: Being an incident of war, military occupation confers upon the invading force the means of exercising control for the period of occupation. It does not transfer the sovereignty to the occupant, but simply the authority or power to exercise some of the rights of sovereignty. The exercise of these rights results from the established power of the occupant and from the necessity of maintaining law and order, indispensable both to the inhabitants and to the occupying force. Section 369 of the same field manual entitled Local Law and New Legislation states that the penal laws of the occupied territory shall remain in force. It is for this reason that in the current War on Terror US lieutenants can be seen to be acting in temporarily municipal capacities as Afghani town mayors etc. Clearly neither of the above regulations was observed by the US in Hawaii. The political crisis of the Spanish American war provided the motive and the opportunity to annex Hawaii. From this point onward the military buildup in Hawaii took off in earnest. To keep the war outside the continental US and to protect shipping posts, a large navy was to be created with naval outposts at Hawaii, Guam, Subic Bay and Pago Pago in Samoa. By attaining Hawaii unlawfully, the US has demonstrated that military, economic and political motives came first. Hawaii did indeed continue to prove to be the strategically valuable military outpost that it was presented as in the 1890s. At no time more so than during WWII. The war was fundamentally a global war between different colonial powers about who gets to control what. After the war ended, the United Nations was set up and charged with tackling the question of colonialism itself. The 1950s saw a wave of colonialist movements and clearly the US began to see Hawaii as being in danger of falling outside of the US sphere of influence. Statehood was voted upon in 1959 and Hawaiis ties to the US were formalized. At this time the minority of the population were Hawaiians whose sovereignty had been taken away, and the vote was passed by the very people who benefited from the illegal regime change. These people were the settlers from the US, the Asian laborers they had brought to the Islands and US military personnel stationed and living there. Clearly the interests of the native Hawaiians was placed at the forefront in this vote for statehood (a concept the UN refers to as a duty of sacred trust.) The ballot for statehood gave the whole experience the veneer of democracy. Article Six  of the United States Constitution  makes treaties made by the US a part of the supreme law of the land, the constitution. As a signatory to the United Nations and by acting in contravention of its codes, the US was thereby violating both international and domestic (constitutional) law, in order to further its military and strategic aims. In his (of the time) groundbreaking work The Tragedy of American Diplomacy, William Appleman Williams shoes how America has used informal empire to influence and shape weaker states into an American political and economic mold. At the time of publication, Appleman Williams in his conclusion chapter references the then ongoing Vietnam war and he draws parallels with this and the way the United States acted in the past (Hawaii and the expansionism era of the 1890s.) It is interesting to now be able to draw parallels with the Bush Doctrine as evidenced in the Global War on Terror. Williams comments on the Open Door policy for foreign expansionism which helped America out of the slump of 1893 (in essence, the scramble for China.) This foreign policy advanced by U.S. Secretary of State John Hay allowed imperial powers to equally access the Chinese market, without in fact colonizing it. (It was a great fear of the U.S. that China would be colonized thereby threatening U.S. commercial interests.)   He provided a revisionist interpretation of the debates occurring in the 1890s: at the time it was imperialist vs. anti-imperialist Williams shifts this analysis to colonialist vs. anti-colonialist. This analysis provides us with further proof that the American experiment differed in substantial ways from the colonial empires of the Old World. His analysis also questions the then pervading narrative of Americas altruistic exceptionalism as being the primary driver in entering into foreign wars. Again, parallels can be drawn between more recent US Oil wars. In an inte resting contemporary development on the Hawaii situation, President Clinton in 1993 (100 years after the overthrow) signed a congressional joint resolution into law, known as the Apology Resolution. It acknowledges that the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii occurred with the active participation of agents and citizens of the United States and further acknowledges that the Native Hawaiian people never directly relinquished to the United States their claims to their inherent sovereignty as a people over their national lands, either through the Kingdom of Hawaii or through a plebiscite or referendum  [21]   To conclude, it is evident that a marked shift in occurred in the American foreign policy and militarism in the 1890s, culminating in the Spanish-American war. Americas approach to the Hawaii situation and the ultimate annexation of the islands was a turning point, and was clearly the first real evidence of the new American empire. I have reviewed debates and accounts from the time and later, influential revisionist writers such as Appleman Williams who makes comparisons to the then current Vietnam situation. I have reviewed and discussed recent literature from critics of current U.S. wars and drawn comparisons between Hawaii in 1898 and current conflicts over 100 years later. The conclusion is that although the symbol or form of empire is different it is still there.

Literary Analysis of Dr. Seuss Essay -- Dr. Seuss Books Literature chi

Literary Analysis of Dr. Seuss Theodor Seuss Geisel, better known as Dr. Seuss, is perhaps one of the most beloved children’s authors of the twentieth century. Although he is most famous as an author of children’s books, Geisel was also a political cartoonist, advertisement designer, and film director (Kaplan). He used the power of imagination to produce unforgettable children’s books and helped solve the problem of illiteracy among America’s children. By using his experiences in life as a foundation for most of his books, Theodor Geisel created a unique writing style that incorporated various elements and techniques, enabling his books to appeal to people of all ages.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The animated life of Theodor Geisel is evident in his literary masterpieces. He was born on March 2, 1904 in Springfield, Massachusetts to Theodor and Henrietta Geisel (Ford 14). Geisel grew up speaking German and English, and his fascination with quirky words began at an early age due to his family. For example, his sister, Margaretha, called herself Marnie Ding Ding Guy, and his first creation was the Wynnmph with ears three yards long (Kaplan). During his childhood, Geisel read widely and often - developing his voracious reading habit at an early age. By the time he was six years old, Ted was already reading Charles Dickens and Robert Louis Stevenson (Kaplan). However, college education never interested him. Labeled â€Å"Least Likely To Succeed† by his fellow classmates at Dartmouth University, Theodor often got in trouble for partying and was forced to resign from the school humor magazine. This gave birth to numerous pseudonyms of Geisel, such as L. B urbank, Thomas Mott Osbourne, Ted Seuss, Seuss, Dr. Seuss, and Theo LeSieg (Hurst). In his adult life, Theodor created various political cartoons for Judge, a humor magazine, and PM, a noted political magazine. The illustrations in these early cartoons foreshadow the quirky illustrations found in his children’s books (Kaplan). Geisel turned to writing children’s books when creating numerous ads for the popular insecticide, Flit, left him with little to do during the winter months (Hurst). By 1990, Dr. Seuss had written over forty books, two of which were Caldecott Honor books, and won two Academy Awards for his documentaries (Krull 39). Unfortunately, battling glaucoma and cataracts became too much for Theodor; he died on September... ...hors who got away with moralizing. The quirky illustrations and creative wordplay enable his readers to enjoy his books, while at the same time recognize morals (Hurst). Because of his innovative approach to writing books for children, Dr. Seuss has influenced American society immensely. The Oobleck he created in Bartholomew and Oobleck became the green, slimy gunk now seen on popular television networks, such as Nickelodeon (Ford 66). Furthermore, his publishing company, Beginner Books, produced a new series of children’s books called the Berenstein Bears, enabling children to enjoy more reading (Kaplan).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Dr. Seuss revolutionized children’s literature and instilled in children the desire to read. According to literary critic Clifton Fadiman, â€Å"Theodor Geisel Seuss provided ingenious and uniquely witty solutions to the standing problem of illiteracy among children (qtd. in Kaplan).† Due to various influential figures and profound experiences during his lifetime, as well as expert use of creative literary techniques, Theodor Seuss Geisel’s children’s books continue to compel readers of all ages – allowing them to escape into different worlds filled with nonsense.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  

Consumer Psychology and Marketing Communications Essay

At any given moment during the day, decisions such as which brand of merchandise to purchase, which color paint to select, or what cable service provider to go with are being made by consumers. The selection and behaviors of the consumers go beyond their personal preferences and has been studied by psychologists for over a century. Knowing what appeals to consumers and what their preferences are is a crucial part of the business’s success. In Exploration relationships between adoption of new consumer products and relationship marketing by Sarabi, Ahmadi, & Moradi , the relationship between a consumer’s demographic variables and product selection discussed. A second article, Scenes of Consumer Psychology by Rachel Bowlby discusses how consumer psychology presents itself in marketing techniques. Consumer Psychology The specialty that examines the influences a person’s thoughts, beliefs, feelings, and perceptions have on their buying habits is known as consumer psychology. A consumer’s demographic information, how they perceive advertisements, brand exposure, and economic status are just a few factors that can affect their decision making process. In order learn more about the behaviors of buyers, consumer psychologists and businesses can conduct surveys; organize focus groups, send out questionnaires, or through direct observation. If a business can identify the buying habits and influences of their regular customers, they are presented with the opportunity to retain their business while make themselves and the customer happy. Psychological concepts discussed In their article, Exploration relationships between adoption of new consumer products and relationship marketing, Sarabi, Ahmadi, & Moradi argue that consumers’ characteristics affect their buying habits. According to Sarabi, Ahmadi & Moradi (2013), â€Å"Empirical research has demonstrated that social-demographic characteristics have significant influence on NPA behavior and suggests that younger, higher income and better educated consumers tend to accept market innovations more quickly† (para. 2). Another factor that influences their likeliness to buy or accept new  products is the image portrayed. For example, if sports fan sees their favorite player endorsing a sports drink, they may be more likely to purchase or try that brand of drink. In the second article, Scenes of consumer psychology by Rachel Bowlby, she discusses the presentation of consumer psychology in marketing. According to Bowlby, there are two types of consumers; romantic and classical. Bowlby states that romantic consumers are those who are influenced by their emotions. Does the product make them happy or feel a certain way? Does it make them feel nostalgic or affluent? The majority of society would be considered romantic consumers. Classical consumers, on the other hand, are those who look for the security and savings. They look for the simplest and most direct way to achieve their goal. When looking for a new cell phone the classical consumer may decide to go with the flip phone that doesn’t allow you to download a bunch of applications. However, the romantic consumer may start with the goal of buying a simple phone but is drawn in by the excitement of all the extras a smart phone may have to offer, even if not needed. Relationship between consumer psychology and marketing What both articles aim to show is that a person’s emotions and environment can influence their buying habits. If a business can identify emotional triggers in their regular customers, then they are able to keep them coming back. Another way a business can retain that business is by offering products that are within their regular customer’s socio-economic status. For example, my family owns a women’s clothing store. We see a wide range of customers for all walks of life. After building our business and customer base, we started to recognize faces and learn a little about them. Through observations and asking the right questions, we were able to determine that a large portion of our customer base was lower-middle class. We also found that we had many romantic-buyers who would see nice things that were affordable. One item that has appealed to our customer base is a brand of jeans that we carry. The name brand jean can cost over $100 per pair in a department store, but they are able to get a similar item for half the cost. Seeing that they were able to afford more and still get quality merchandise has made them more likely to purchase multiple items from us and continue to shop in our store. Conclusion Knowing what is important to customers is a critical component of business ownership. Both articles discussed have shown a relationship between consumers buying trends and how their decisions can be affected by their experience and opinions. Whether a consumer is basing his decision on logic or how the product makes them feel, it is the job of the merchant to learn their customer base to provide products that will make both types of customers happy and coming back for more. REFERENCES Bowlby, R. (1992). Scenes from consumer psychology. Critical Quarterly, 34(4), 51-64. Sarabi, S., Ahmadi, F., & Moradi, M. A. (2013). Exploration relationship between adoption of new consumer products and relationship marketing. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 5(2), 80-89. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1426053966?accountid=458

Descartes Dream Argument Essay

How do we know we are not dreaming some particular experience we are having, or we are not dreaming all our experience of this world? When we dream we imagine things happening often with the same sense of reality as we do when we are awake. In Descartes dream argument, he states there are no reliable signs distinguishing sleeping from waking. In his dream argument, he is not saying we are merely dreaming all of what we experience, nor, is he saying we can distinguish dreaming from being awake. I think his point is we cannot be for sure what we experience as being real in this world is actually real. When Descartes remembers occasions when he is dreaming, he falsely believes he is awake. Reflecting on this, Descartes thinks he cannot ever tell whether or not he is dreaming. How can he know he perceives his hands right now? Maybe, it is all just a dream. If it were just a dream everything would seem to be the same. In order to have knowledge the suggestion he is dreaming is false, he somehow has to have some knowledge of being awake. I believe his dream argument could be formed in this way: 1. When we are dreaming we are not in a good position to tell whether we are actually dreaming or awake. 2. Any experience you are having right now could also mean you are dreaming. In other words, you can’t possibly know you are dreaming even if it is a dream. 3a. For each of your experiences, you can’t tell whether your experience is a dream or not. (You can’t tell which of your dreams is a waking experience or a dreaming experience). 3b. For all you know, all of your experiences may be dreams. (You may be walking around in a dream, never having any walking experiences) Most philosophers think the dream argument supports both conclusions, but many philosophers also think this argument is strong enough to support 3a but not 3b. It is not really clear whether Descartes is arguing for the stronger claim or the weaker claim. It could be 3b, the weaker claim, is enough to support his purpose. Maybe he does not need a stronger claim to prove his theory. The last step in Descartes argument says if he cannot tell whether he is dreaming, then how can he trust any of his senses telling him about the environment? To know anything about the external world on the basis of his sensory experiences, it seems like Descartes would have to know those experiences are not all just a dream: To know anything about the external world on the basis or your sensory experiences, you have to know that you are not dreaming. I believe the things in my dreams must have been patterned after real things. So, even if I might be dreaming now, I know the world has colors, things that take up space, have shape, quantity, and a place in space and time. Now if you pull premises 1-4 together, we get the result of the conclusion: 5. Therefore, you can’t know anything about the external world based on your sensory experiences. In an interpretation of Descartes Dream Argument, premise 1 supports premise two and premise 3a and 3b support premise 4. So let us take a look at premise 2, 4, and the conclusion. This looks like the valid inference rule, such as modus ponens. P ? Q P__________ Therefore, Q However, that is not what is exactly happening in the dream argument. For premise 4 says to know you would have to know you are not dreaming. But premise 3 says you cannot know you are dreaming. In order for Modus Ponens argument to work, it would have to contain the premise: â€Å"I know I am dreaming. † Since Descartes cannot actually declare he is dreaming, it will not work. So there goes the premise of the argument. The most Descartes can say in his argument is â€Å"you can’t tell whether you experience is a dream,† premise two states â€Å"You can’t possibly know you are dreaming,† to premise 3, â€Å"you can’t tell if you are dreaming† to the conclusion, â€Å"You can’t know anything. † In order for Modus Ponens to work once again Descartes would have to know he was dreaming. As stated above he cannot state his position as if he is dreaming, so there goes the premises argument. So if this is not a valid argument, then perhaps there is a way to revise my interpretation on Descartes’ Dream argument so it turns out to be a valid rgument. Can we make the argument valid by changing premise 4? 2. Any experience you are having right now could also mean that you are dreaming. In other words, you can’t possibly know that you are dreaming even if it really is a dream. 4. I know that I am dreaming. Therefore, you can’t know anything about the external world based on your sensory experiences. This is now valid but is Descartes actually dreaming? Lets try switching around premises one. 1. If I cannot distinguish with certainty between sense perceptions and dreams, then I cannot believe anything based on images as true. . I cannot distinguish with certainty between sense perceptions and dreams. 3. Therefore, I cannot believe as true anything based on images. The argument is now valid again. But the question remains, whether the argument is sound and all the premises are true. A dream is a dream because its external conditions make it a dream and not because of a sense perception. If I am asleep and having an image of a body, than I am dreaming. If I am awake and having an image of a body, then I am not dreaming. Usually I am having a sense perception, but it could also be a hallucination. Dreaming is a certain kind of state. The only way to know you are not dreaming is to know you are not in a state of being asleep and having mental images, sounds, etc. No amount of images, sounds, can tell me I am in the state of being asleep and having images, sounds, etc. before my mind. If premise 2 is true, you can never be certain you are dreaming, as opposed to having sense perception. For instance, I can never step outside of myself to check what state I am in. It is indeed possible I could be dreaming. Descartes, however, has a very different kind of reply to the dream argument. He does not challenge premise 2 at all, instead he challenges premise one: If I cannot distinguish with certainty between sense perceptions and dreams, then I cannot believe as true anything based on images, etc. Descartes states in meditation one, â€Å"Nevertheless, it surely must be admitted that the things seen during slumber are, as it were, like plain images, which could only have been produced in the likeness of true things, and these general things —eyes, hands, head, and the whole body,–are not imaginary things, but are true and exist. This statement is actually very clear because the reply is the contents of dreams (Mt. Everest, other people, houses, etc) must come from reality. We get images through the world that we live in, so even if I am dreaming, I know there are mountains, people, and houses. They must exist in order to have dreams like the ones I have. If the world was different then I would have different kinds of dreams. † In Descartes final thoughts he admits it seems to be possible I am now dreaming even though no one could know anything about the world around us. I think Descartes point to be made throughout the dream argument is we are able we are not dreaming if we are to know an external world around us. If we are to know our external world around us, then we would have a better understanding of why we dream. It would also give us a better understand to distinguish from being awake to dreaming. It seems to me the point throughout his dream argument the point he is trying to make is we cannot be sure of what we experience as being real in the world is actually real. Descartes may have not made his point to be valid or true, but made us think outside the box, there are other possible choices to why we experience these thoughts when we dream.