Analyze the Theory of Knowledge Essay

Bertrand Russell was a British philosopher and a mathematician who is generally recognized as one of the founders of analytic philosophy. He, like many other people was searching for proof and evidence of us- people being rational animals, whose thoughts and actions are reasonable and sensible. Reason is a way of knowing in which we build up explanations by refining independent ideas and theories in order to reach a logical conclusion or in other words we use reason to decide whether something is correct or wrong.
Through observations and experiments we can prove by reason if our hypothesis was right, and by this broaden our knowledge horizons. Reason is present as much as in everyday choice making, as it is present in science, mathematics and other areas of knowledge. However reason is not always the most useful way of knowledge, for example in music and arts, as we are not robots and we also rely on our emotions and perception. So how can we gain truth by reason, when there are so many different opinions and emotions involved?
Reason can help us gain knowledge, but only to a certain extent and therefore it has its strengths and weaknesses, which I am going to discuss in my essay. In science logic and reason are said to be the core element to get a valid conclusion, but there are some contradictions and exceptions to this general judgment. For example in biology, we use reason and logic to make a hypothesis, and then through several experiments or observations, we can obtain a valid and logical conclusion, which will support our hypothesis.

As an example, a biology class, had to run an experiment to find out the presence of glucose and starch in two different food solutions. In two test tubes A and B, two different food solutions, which are unknown to the students, are found. The class divided into four different groups and each group had to add chemicals such as iodine for starch and benedicts solution for glucose to find out, in which test tube was each solution. If starch was present the solution had to turn from blue to black, and for glucose it had to change from blue to orange.
Group 1, was successful and their one solution turned to black, proving that it has starch in it and the other turned orange demonstrating that it has glucose. Group 2 however, had a negative outcome, as both of their solutions did not change color, therefore showing that it has none of the solutions present. One of the solutions of group 3 turned green, instead of orange, therefore contradicting the hypothesis and the whole theory. By this example we see that logic and reason, has its own uncertainties and doubts.
Reason can sometimes obscure our knowledge if we see something, which contradicts our initial theory. This logic is quite similar to perception, as we need to use our five senses- see, hear, touch, taste and smell to acquire a rational verdict. In music and art, I think that reason as a way of knowing has both advantages and disadvantages. We cannot express our opinion on a piece of music or a piece of art without bringing up emotion and perception.
A composer cannot write music without any feelings, same as an artist cannot paint without inspiration through his senses. A piece of music however requires some basic reason. For example if a composer needs to write a concerto for a violin, he will not write a concerto for a piano, and no other instrument than a violin can replace it. This is very basic reason, but we can see that it is present in creative arts. I am an IB Art student and I know that reason has little to do with it.
Making art is based mostly on emotion and on the way we feel or what we think at a certain moment. Art comes from the heart, and reason is only present when we need to know which two colors for example make purple or what do we need to do to make a canvas. Add reason Another demonstration of advantages and disadvantages of reason is present the case of superstitions. In many cultures superstitions make up a lot of beliefs that are carried throughout generations. For example it is said that it is bad luck to go forward of a black cat has passed your way.
Even though I have never heard anyone claim that he or she has bad luck because of a cat passing his or her way, I would still rather prefer to avoid it, as I was brought up with this and I actually started to believe in it. Even though there is no scientific prove of this superstition and common logic experience says that this is not true, most people would still avoid it. Therefore reason can be very objective, in a way that it can differ from different cultures and dissimilar beliefs. Mathematics is the one area where reason plays a fundamental part.
Reason is the basis on which mathematics is founded. Before any mathematical theorem can be taken as true, it must be backed by a reasonable mathematical proof that shows, that the answer got is correct. This type of empirical, reasonable verification shows that of all the areas of knowledge, mathematics uses reason the most. In mathematics, an answer is either wrong or right. There is no midpoint in mathematics. Without reason, all mathematical arguments would naturally fail, and so if a mathematical statement cannot be fortified with reason, the statement should be rejected.
Mathematics is the only area of knowledge where every statement must be backed up by reason. Reason itself is not enough to explain such things as the origins of the universe, or right and wrong, and so reason can and should be complemented by other sources of knowledge. Reason can be used when the sense misinformed us. For example when you put a straw in water senses tell us that the straw is bent, because it looks like it, but through reason we deduce that the straw is straight. Therefore reason is more reliable than our senses and is used more effectively.
For the conclusion, I should discuss whether in the end our knowledge can be obtained purely by logic and reason, or it needs the support of human emotion and perception to give us reasonable comprehension of our existence. “Man is a rational animal who always loses his temper when called upon to act in accordance with the dictates of reason,”- this is a quote by Oscar Wilde. I agree with him as I think that emotions and feelings often overtake reason, as we are more driven by our desires, fears and passion than logic and rationality.
I think that pure reason cannot exist without other ways of knowledge, and has its strengths and weaknesses. Reason is valid when it is not contradicted by anyone, but can we call something rational knowledge when someone disputes it? Reason within its domain is very reliable, as for example in mathematics, you can be almost one hundred percent certain that something is true, and this is the main strength of reason. I think that in all the other areas of knowledge, reason has many weaknesses.
Reason always needs input from another source and therefore can only be reliable as its source of data. In the arts, in the absence of inspiration, no great work can be done, however reason is present in the mixing of colors and proportion and so on. Science without any data has no use of reason, and is therefore unreliable. My conclusion to this essay is that reason always needs input from another source and therefore can only be reliable as its source of data.


Ethical Theories Persuasive Essay

Ethical Theories ETH/316 April 9, 2013 Ethical Theories Introduction Ethics is system of moral principles, the way individuals conduct themselves with respect to the right and wrong of their actions and to the good and bad of any motives and ends of such actions. Ethics are instilled in individuals since they were children by parents, teachers, and loved ones. This paper will show the similarities and differences between virtue theory, utilitarianism, and deontological ethics. Similarities and Differences Understanding the similarities between virtue theory, utilitarianism, and deontological ethics, they first must be defined.
Boylan (2009) stated, “Virtue ethics is also sometimes called agent based or character ethics. It takes the viewpoint that in living your life you should try to cultivate excellence in all that you do and all that others do” (p. 133). Individuals who judge others by his or her character rather than his or her actions, exemplifies the virtue theory of ethics. Utilitarianism is defined as a theory that an action is morally right when that action is for the greater good of a group rather than just an individual (Boylan, 2009).
Utilitarianism theory is based upon creating the greatest good for a number of people. An individual can be overlooked in order to achieve a greater goal for all individuals involved. Deontology ethics is a moral theory that suggests that an individual’s duty to do a certain task because the action, itself, is right, and not through any other sorts of calculations—such as the consequences of the action (Boylan, 2009). Basically the theory suggests that individuals have a moral obligation to follow certain rules that are deemed unbreakable.

Virtue theory determines the good and bad traits of a person over a long period of time. Utilitarianism theory also finds the good in a person – provides guidance for behavior and enables people to know what differentiates as a good moral choice. Deontology recommends an action based upon principle. Utilitarianism is the end justifies the mean while deontology is the end does not justify the means. Virtue theory is a broad term that relates to the individuals character and virtue in morals rather than doing their duty or acting to bring about good choices. Personal Experience
From the time we are able to walk and talk we are given rules from our parents. Those rules are not given as punishment, but to guide us in life to know what is right from wrong. We are taught morals on how to act, how to treat others, not to lie or be disrespectful. We are taught virtues that were instilled in our parents from their parents and passed on from generation to generation in hopes that we learn from their past mistakes. They place values in us that we will grow up to do the right things in life and teach others and to lead by example. Conclusion
Ethics is something everyone learns from a young age and individuals either grow with it or they choose to follow another path in life that may not be as good as it should have been. Ethics is learned it is not something that is already in place. Some people go above and beyond, why others falter. People all have a choice in life as the path they travel down. Every individual should instill some form of ethics within them so the world could be a better place to live in. Reference Boylan, M. (2009). Basic Ethics: Basic ethics in action (2nd ed. ). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.


Soc Theory Paper

‘it is always the doctors patient’ This paper will be discussing the struggle of allied health practitioners to achieve professional status. This health issue can be discussed under many different sociological theories however Feminism in particular sociological/ Marxist feminism with touching on post modern feminism also, shows great understanding around the health issues and gives an understanding of the way of health and health care in Australia.
It explains how medical dominance in this field overrights the Allied health professional through subordination the allied health professionals being under direct authority of doctors in the hospital system in particular. Feminism also shows that in this field Allied health practioners are predominantly woman and medical professionals hold a patriarchy over allied health and the sexual division of the two. Finally closing point of how many womens health issues in past and present are again predominantly male.
Medical dominance, “the professional dominance of medicine due to doctors” (Fridson 1970). Allied health profressionals struggle to receive professional status in the health industry, due to the fact that doctors and medical professionals hold dominance and “power” over those knowledge based practioners in an area of a specific field. Medical dominance has a few areas in which it exerts control, subordination being a key area, it ensures some health care workers Eg Nurses, OT’s etc all to work under direct authority of doctors, especially in hospital system (Willis 2004).

Sociological feminism looks at the “ruling class” system, Medical professionals hold the hiearchy position or the upper class level with higher wealth, income funding and power, Allied health is placed in the lower class or the working class due to the fact that they are controlled or dominated by the upper class or the hiarchy or the industry, as they receive less funding and have little control over receiving their patients due to the fact that doctors write the referrals for the clients to access the allied health professionals.
Another issues amoungst allied health in the power struggle with medical dominance is the fact that most allied health positions are filled with females. Because of “the informal role of woman was to be the carer “ ( Germov 2009), a woman is seen to this begun woman gaining positions as nurses or midwives, as these are seen as caring roles or ‘womens’ jobs’ which then progessed to woman expanding into allied health positions as the access of education became greater to woman,


Theories of Group Formation

Theories of Group Formation Below is an explanation of the different models of group formation processes by Lewin, Tuckman, McGrath, and Gersick including the major features, steps, and characteristics. Tuckman (1965), stated these roles/processes are needed for group formation: Forming: Group members learn about each other, and the task at hand. Indicators of this stage might include: unclear objectives, confusion, and low morale. Storming: As group members continue to work, they will engage each other in arguments about the structure of the group which often are significantly emotional and illustrate a struggle for status in the group.
Lack of cohesion marks this phase. Norming: Group members establish implicit or explicit rules about how they will achieve their goal. They address the types of communication that will or will not help with the task. Indicators include: Questioning performance, Reviewing/clarify objective, Changing/confirming roles, Opening risky issues, Assertiveness, Listening, Testing new ground, Identifying strengths and weaknesses. Performing: Groups reach a conclusion and implement the conclusion. Indicators include: Creativity, Initiative, Flexibility, and Open relationships.
McGrath (1991), stated these roles/processes are needed for group formation: Mode I: Inception and acceptance of a project (goal choice) Mode II: Technical problem solving – solution of technical issues (means choice) Mode III: Conflict resolution – resolution of political issues conflict (policy choice) Mode IV: Execution – the performance requirements of the project (goal attainment) Unfreezing – this phase involves overcoming inertia and dismantling the existing “mind set”. Defense mechanisms have to be bypassed. Change – typically a period of confusion and transition.

One is aware that the old ways are being challenged but does not have a clear picture to replace them yet. Freezing – the new mindset is crystallizing and one’s comfort level is returning to previous levels. Phase 1 – behavioral patterns and assumptions through which a group approaches its project emerges in its first meeting, and the group stays with the framework through the first half of its life. Teams may show little visible progress during this time because members are unable to perceive a use for the information they are generating until they revise the initial framework.
Midpoint – at calendar midpoints, groups experience transitions-paradigmatic shifts in their approaches of their work enabling them to capitalize on the gradual learning they have done and make significant advances. This is an opportunity for the group to alter the course of its life midstream. Phase 2 – this is a second period of inertial movement, and takes its direction from plans crystallized during the transition. At completion, when a team makes a final effort to satisfy outside expectations, it experiences the positive and negative consequences of past choices.
I see many roles that leaders need to provide in the group development process. A leader needs understanding of critical theories about how people learn, an understanding of patterns of discrimination and inequalities, and the benefits and liabilities associated with individual groups. Along with the ability to articulate his/her own philosophy of education, and use it to empower others’ active participation in their own transformation. According to Katzenbach and Smith (2005), effective working groups need little time to shape their purpose, since the leader usually establishes it.
Despite the fact that many leaders refer to group reporting to them as a team, few groups really are. Leaders, however, should make sure the team succeeds in identifying specific purposes and goals. If the leader of a group wants to improve performance overall, he/she needs to find a way of the group taking shared ownership for the results. It is likely that a shift from individual responsibility to shared responsibility can only be achieved if the pay and reward system has a significant element that is dependent on the overall outcome.
The knowledge, skills and attitudes of the leader may also need to shift significantly to be effective in this new environment. For example, a leader may need to share all of the individuals’ results with the group. The group has the right to know how others are performing if their pay depends on it. This could be a challenging experience for a leader who has avoided the potential emotional stress that can be caused by this level of openness.
Kozlowski and Bell (2003), stated that team training and leadership interventions have the potential to enhance team development, it is a process that generally unfolds naturally without intentional intervention. Thus the potential for improving team development and team effectiveness in many organizations is high. “However, team training and team leadership are key leverage points for enhancing the developmental process by intervening before or as teams are formed (team training) and as they proceed through the developmental rocess in the work setting (team leadership and coaching). ” Kozlowski & Bell (2003). The theory that appeals to me the most is Tuckman’s theory of group formation. I believe I feel this way because it is most familiar to me, and have gone through the formal stages of forming, norming, storming, and performing. I was also a participant in a class called “How best to form your team”. This class went over these ideals that Tuckman mentions. Refer ences Gersick, Connie J. G. (1988). Time and Transition in Work Teams: Toward a New Model of Group Development.
Academy of Management Journal. Vol. 31, No. 1, 9-41. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database Katzenbach, Jon R. & Smith, Douglas K. (2005). The Discipline of Teams. The Harvard Business Review. July-August, 2005. pp. 162-171. Kozlowski, S. (2006). Group development. Encyclopedia of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Retrieved from Sage e-References, Walden Library Kozlowski, S. W. J. , & Bell, B. S. (2003). Work groups and teams in organizations. In W. C. Borman, ed. , D. R. Ilgen, ed. , & R. J. Klimoski, ed. (Eds. ), ed. Handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 333-375). London: Wiley. Lewin, K. (1999). Experiments in social space. Reflections, 1(1), 7-13. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database McGrath, J. E. (1991). Time, interaction, and performance (TIP): A theory of groups. Small Group Research, 22(2), 147-174. Retrieved from SAGE Management and Organization Studies Full Text Collection Tuckman, B. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384-399. Retrieved from PsycARTICLES database


Belbin’s Team Role Theory

It is also important to remember that in order to make the team’s successful; team members should be corporative and not competitive with each other. The team members should trust each other in the tea and there should not be any conflicts and nobody should feel betrayed. Most importantly team members should represent a team which is cohesive and a sense of “we-ness” should prevail. (Robert Kreitner, 2004 , p. 455-459) In today’s competitive environment, those teams are successful which are self managed.
They are teams which are delegated administrative authorities for their task portfolio. They are also called semiautonomous teams and also super teams sometimes. Self managed teams have a positive impact on the work productivity. They give employees the authority to work in their own way but they are at the same time accountable for the results they present. It is also important to note that self managed teams do not completely eliminate the need for managerial supervision.
They need guidance and supervision in the course of their work and also somebody to ensure the proper working of the team in the right direction. (Robert Kreitner, 2004 , p. 465-468) Lastly, high performance teams are those teams which have a participative leadership with empowered employees. A tram that trust each other, shares knowledge and responsibility for work, a team which is focused towards the long-term success and a team which is proactive.

A team which has all these aspects is a team which will succeed in any task that it wants to perform. (Robert Kreitner, 2004 , p. 470) Born in 1926, Dr Meredith Belbin was an expert at team roles and has contributed a deal to increasing team effectiveness through his theory on work teams. This theory help us in understanding team roles better so that we can adjust them better in organization in order to increase team productivity. (Beblin’s Team Work Theory, 1994)
When considering team development, Belbin in his theory explains that during the process a person adopts several central and sub dominant roles, depending upon the situation. These roles can be classified into nine different types, each having its own strengths and weaknesses. A brief introduction to these roles is as follows: A Coordinator may not always be the central prominent figure in a team, but he a person who can be trusted for sound advice and is also a good listener. (Beblin’s Team Work Theory, 1994)
A Shaper is a person who is highly motivated to achieve the desired objectives, by all possible means. He can be aggressive at times and challenge other team members. The presence of more than two shapers can lead to team conflicts according to Belbin’s team role theory. (Beblin’s Team Work Theory, 1994) A Plant is a dominant team player who is focused to solve major problems rather than being involved in minor details. He is also characterized as a person who has a high IQ level and is an idea generator.


Cognitive Theories of Crime: Overview and Features

The Cognitive Theory is a thought process that stores information, so that the information can be interpreted correctly by a criminal. The next part of the process is how criminals can take the appropriate action and so they can make their final decision on their thoughts. According to the way the cognitive theory looks at people and the way information can be process properly. The cognitive theory shows that criminals don’t make proper choices and decision like normal people. The theory shows how people do not make the best judgment of the information gathered to be process correctly. Cognitive theory is built around the process of a criminal’s actions, thoughts, personality, and to some degree the circumstances around them. One of the most controversial part of the cognitive theory is a severe mood disorders can be change by a criminal’s patterns of thinking.
In contrast the cognitive theory looks at a criminal who is prone to commit crimes, to have some sort of cognitive deficit related to the cognitive part of their brain. The deficit keeps people from making the right decisions. The portion of the brain that controls the cognitive part doesn’t allow a criminal to view or make correct decision’s, because they can’t process information correctly. They may view committing a crime for their own personal satisfaction or personal needs. They don’t process emotion well.
They also do their best to avoid all social behavior with people. They will have behaviors that are satisfying to them. This will turn out to be very detrimental and harmful to them. When they are faced with punishment whether it be legal or not it doesn’t deter them, because a person with a cognitive issue just tries to calculate the cost of their action. A person with a cognitive issue can’t process information so they end up committing crimes. People who have cognitive behavior issues are law violator that may seek out satisfaction for their crimes.

People who suffer from this behavior thinks that the world is against them, they think that their control is gone. They may feel that when negative events in their life happen. Control is lost, so they act out. They hold on to their attitudes of breaking rules and some just give up easily on their criminal acts without thinking about their actions on the situation. When criminals suffer from this behavior they find it hard to understand or sympathize with others. When this happens, it leads criminals to blame victims for their problems. Criminals lose their ability for emotions and feelings. This takes them down a path to criminal behavior and to commit crimes against innocent victims. As a result, they feel their behaviors are justified and beneficial to satisfy their needs.
The cognitive theory shows that criminals with this issue just can’t control their emotions, feelings, behaviors, along with their ability to not process information like a normal person does. This theory shows they don’t fear the law or punishment of their actions like others. They have lost all control of processing normal thoughts. A lot of things happen when the cognitive process is broken, it causes a person to have many psychological issues throughout life. People with this problem will need a lot of mental health care throughout their life, this can cause them to have problems in their families with abuse to people or children physical and sexual because they don’t care about their victims. This why many psychologists focus on mental issues with the cognitive theory as well.
The Rational Choice Theory goes over a few various parts. The rational choice theory shows the cost and benefits of a criminal’s actions who is looking to commit a crime. Its shows how some criminal choses to commit crimes and how they make criminal decisions. The Theory goes over their behaviors. The rational choice theory does show how predictable, and how criminals analyze their criminal behavior to commit these acts of violence. This theory is an approach to criminal causation.
According to the concepts of the rational choice theory it looks at the law-violating behavior of a criminal. Is does show their behavior is a part of a careful thought out and planning process when committing their criminal acts. The rational choice theory assumes that criminals will commit crimes, and how they do weigh out the cost and benefits of the potential crime. There are many personal factors like money, revenge, thrills, and entertainment in it for them when committing these criminal acts on their victims. There are situational factors for the rational choice theory like, availability, security measures, and police presence in their area of the crimes. The concept part shows that anyone has the potential to be a criminal, because they calculate how big the risks are also how small the risks are.
Criminals discuss and plan out their crimes along with weighing out the cost of doing it. The theory looks at how a criminal will view and analyze their victims. The criminal will look for the easiest targets to victimize so the risk of getting caught by the police is low. For Example: If you post on Facebook I’m going on vacation and the dates a criminal knows the cost and benefits of robbing you home are in their favor. The criminality of the behavior is the control by increasing the cost of the crime, but by reducing the potential gain from the crime. Most people who commit crimes are not worried about the law or the punishment of there actions. Criminals are not afraid of being sent to jail or prison for the crimes.
The value of their crime is what they see. Criminals enjoy the trill an excitement of breaking the law. They have a low stake in conformity, because they are willing to do what ever it takes to commit their crimes. Some criminals will even commit murder on their victims just to ensure their getaway. The rational choice theory effects both rich and poor people, it’s the trill of getting away with the crime. In contrast the criminal’s decision to commit crimes are reached when a criminal thinks he or she have out weighed the risks of their crimes verse the rewards or their crimes. Criminals stand a good chance of being caught and being punished at the same time they have no fear of consequences, they risk losing their families, respect, reputation, and feelings about their actions.
When the risk of being caught out weights the profit and pleasure of the crime. Rational choice theory shows the offense-specific and offender specific view of the crimes. Someone who decides they want to steal something goes and evaluate their targets, look at their surrounds, how often the police patrol the area, entry and exit points, and what is the like hood of being captured by someone. Criminals most likely have antisocial behavior when around people. The rational choice theory shows how structing criminality works on offenders, and how someone decides to choose crime and deviance.
Criminals commit crimes for the excitement and trills of their actions. One of the factors are economic needs and the opportunity to commit their criminal actions on victims. That is the most crucial decision that criminals make before they commit crimes. The rational choice theory looks at personal traits, the structing of crime, choosing the place of their crime, and choosing the victims for the criminal act. Therefor criminals us many ways and thoughts and choices before going and caring out their criminal act against their victims.
When we look to compare the two theory’s it is interesting how the two compares to each other and what similarities that the rational choice and cognitive theories have. The rational choice theory shows how criminals weigh out the cost of there crimes they are planning to commit on victims. They will also look at the benefit of their crimes. In both theories it shows how criminals don’t fear punishment for their criminal acts along with antisocial issues. The cognitive and rational theory shows how criminals like the excitement of committing a crime on their victims. The both like to pick easy targets to go victimize. This way they can take what they want a don’t fear being caught or being punished for their actions. It shows in both theories that offenders don’t care about the victims in their crimes.
When you compare the two theories you can see the simulates between cognitive theory and the rational choice theory. The criminals in the cognitive theory are the same as the rational theory both are willing to commit crimes for personal satisfaction of their crimes they commit. In both theories the criminals seem to like the trill of committing and getting away with their crimes. It does show that in both theories the criminals cognitive portion of their brain to process information on what they do does not work right for them as well. In the rational choice and cognitive theory criminals look at how to calculate the risk and cost of committing their crimes and how to get away with it as well.
The comparison of both theories shows how they are both law violators in each theory. It appears to show how both are offense-specific and offender-specific. The criminals in both theories don’t care about their victims only how the can benefit from the criminal acts. The criminals in each theory feels that they are justified in the actions and crimes they have committed so no laws or punishment scares them. These criminal acts effect both the wealthy and poor people of the world therefore show how anyone can be a victim of a criminal act. In the theories it shows that criminal use a certain process in committing crimes and how they do it weather it is choice or a want.
Criminals in these two theories will lose their close family members, friends, co-workers, image, and reputation when they commit criminal acts in their life. This effects how the world views criminals. The biggest comparison and contrast of the two are the cost and benefit of there crimes the commit against victims. Also, how they view and commit these criminal acts against their victims and how they choose the victims. So, when comparing the rational choice and cognitive theory you can see how much they favor on certain parts of the theories.