Public Policy Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Public Policy - Coursework Example Understanding public policy involves a series of individual values towards the realization of a greater goal. Therefore, unlike Science, public policy is an Art. It is, therefore, prudent for policymakers to adopt measures that put the interests of the entire society at heart. â€Å"The basic element of understanding public policy for a better society is communication† (McConnell, 2010 p.89). Policy maker ought to adopt a legal approach towards communicating with the members of the society in an attempt to enhance understanding of public policy. If policymakers created channels for communication, the policies implemented would be favorable to all and ensure that all the relevant factors considered. Policymakers ought to evaluate the effectiveness of policies implemented in terms of their effectiveness towards improving the society (McConnell, 2010). They should install internal control measures to ensure that the policies implemented achieve the objectives. In addition, policies are similar to projects; every project has a lifespan. The internal controls may include evaluations, audits, and reviews. A policy may not achieve its purpose if it is implemented then ignored. Just as an automobile requires servicing, public policies are reviewed to assess whether they achieve the intended purpose. Policymakers are entrusted with public resources, and ought to uphold the code of ethical conduct. They can perfect their craft for the betterment of society if they perform their roles in a manner that upholds and respects moral values and public office respectively (McConnell,

How far does Pentheus Essay Example for Free

How far does Pentheus Essay At the beginning of the play I think I would be inclined to agree that Pentheus deserves his punishment but by the end after we are shown the way that Dionysus reacts to him and how his punishment is completed, I would probably say he does not deserve the punishment he was given. In my opinion it was vile and unnecessary but the ancient Greeks took the Gods will very seriously and the fact that a King was not welcoming to a new god, seemingly insulted them and thus forced Dionysus to exact revenge upon him. At the start when Pentheus enters he declares that he has heard rumours that this new god is driving the women to leave their homes and have criminal actions. He says his worshippers are frolicking and satisfying the lusts of men. He is basing these blames purely on rumour and even calls Dionysus a parvenu god. He is not respecting the new god and even though he knows the gods can punish humans, he still refuses to worship him; he even states that he will leave him out of his worship when he goes to sleep. He calls him some foreigner and disrespects him by saying he is a wizard conjuror and had fragrant golden curls, not meaning to compliment him but insult him. Here perhaps he does deserve his punishment because he is disrespectful and unkind to the new god because he is a cynical ruler. Cadmus and Tiresias encourage Pentheus to allow Dionysuss worship into the city but here will listen to none of it and he is rude to both of them (which again, is not expected of a king but his pride and arrogance overpowers his respect for his elders). He has absolutely no piety towards Dionysus and insults him once he is brought (in disguise) to Pentheus. He is given many warnings by Dionysus but Pentheus chooses not to hear then and ignores him, he is spoken to in riddles but Pentheus once again shows no understanding and Pentheus even goes as far as mocking Zeus and this makes us pity him because he does not understand what is going on. In this instance I do not believe he deserves his punishment. He doesnt believe in Dionysus and his obsession with order proves his downfall, in spite of the warnings he is given. Later in the play Dionysus has the upper hand by hypnotising Pentheus and forcing him to see a bull and trying to tie it up. Here we begin to feel sorry for Pentheus and think that it is cruel of Dionysus to trick him. There is a contrast between the rage and frustration of Pentheus and the calmness of Dionysus. A herald comes and tells Pentheus about the worship of the Bacchants and Dionysus is quick to trick him to witness it himself, he is lured like a child and is easily persuaded by Dionysus because he is still hypnotised by him. Because he becomes so child-like and vulnerable our pity for him increases because he is unable to control his actions from here on. I do not believe he deserves his fate now because he is lured by Dionysus charm and he has put all of his trust into the gods hands. We feel sorry for Pentheus here and because he is more innocent here (is persuaded to dress up as a bacchant) and does not deserve this cruel punishment Dionysus has planned for him. Dionysus now becomes the cruel one and plays with Pentheus vulnerable state and mentions sick jokes towards his death by saying you shall ride home in your mothers arms. Which is terrible dramatic irony and we are forced to feel compassionate towards Pentheus because we know exactly what is going to happen to him. Because it is his mother that is going to kill him, I believe he does not deserve to be killed like this, but by his mother killing him it forces us to take more pity on Pentheus and Agave and I do not believe he deserves his punishment like this. It just proves the malice of Dionysus and how far he will go to induce punishment on the city of Thebes in order to be worshipped. So Pentheus deserves his punishment because he was unwilling to accept a new god and refused to worship someone he did not believe in and this resulted in his death but he did not deserve the way in which he was punished because it was his mother who was forced to do it and he was brutally ripped apart while in a child-like state of mind and under Dionysus control. So we feel sympathy towards him and I do not believe he deserved his punishment

Marriage in industrial societies

Marriage in industrial societies Compare and contrast two theories of the change in the age of marriage in industrial societies. There are several theories which attempt to explain the causes behind the changing ages of marriage in industrial societies. While no theory should be seen as all-encompassing or as universally applicable, many have made valuable contributions to the overall debate. The theories presented by Valeria Oppenheimer (1988, 1994, 1997) and David S. Loughran (2002) are two such examples of incisive works that have influenced the direction and scholarly thought on this topic. Before delving into the particulars of these two scholars, it is important to point out some of the problems inherent in attempting to account for such a diverse and important phenomenon. Indeed, the concept of marriage is one that is often culturally contingent and one that can vary among demographic and religious groups. Also, it is important to examine the question of how modern values have contributed to contemporary patterns of marriage. As such, not all industrial societies can be understood as uniformly similar and that the change in age of marriage should also be thought of in terms of time, socioeconomic status, race, and ethnic group. Oppenheimers ‘A Theory of Marriage Timing is deeply concerned with challenging the then popular and prevailing notion that womens economic independence was the major factor in the â€Å"decline in gains to marriage†¦ (and the) rise in delayed marriage† (1988). This notion, to Oppenheimer, is particularly problematic because it tends to â€Å"push people into one of two polar positions:† the growing independence of women could be seen as too high of a price to pay because of its negative impact on society or as an â€Å"unavoidable price for womens liberation† (1988). Instead Oppenheimer, through a modified search-theoretic framework, argues that even if the gains to marriage are reduced through economic independence, the result can have minimal effect on marriage gains in general. The greater independence that women experience creates an environment where they neither are forced to settle or remain in an undesirable situation (1988, p.587). Oppenheimer further discredits the â€Å"independence hypothesis† in ‘Womens Employment and the Gain to Marriage: the Specialization and Trading Model† through a detailed analysis of the literature supporting this notion (1997). Assumptions made by theorists, particularly those held by Gary Becker, are critically examined by Oppenheimer. An important criticism the author makes deals with questioning the starting point of the â€Å"high correlation of the various time series trends† employed by supporters of the independence hypothesis (1997). If one pushes these time-series backwards (and does not have them dated in the 1950s and 1960s) it becomes clear that divorce rates were on the rise well before womens employment started to grow (1997). Further, Oppenheimer attempts to clarify the difference (which she believes is often misunderstood) between the delay of marriage and nonmarriage. She cites important factors why individuals may want to delay marriage, s uch as economic factors or educational attainment (among others) without actually delaying the relative worth or desirability of marriage (1997). In ‘Womens Rising Employment and the Future of the Family in Industrial Societies Oppenheimer explains the change in marriage through the declining position of men in the labor market. Supported by strong evidence linking the connection between early marriage and strong labor markets, Oppenheimer illustrates how men who lack a stable career or career path become less desirable, thus prolonging the search for potential mates. Beckers theory of marriage, which Oppenheimer connects with ideas presented by two of sociologists most notable figures (Parsons and Durkheim), maintains that â€Å"the major gain to marriage lies in the mutual dependence of spouses, arising out of their specialized functions—the woman in domestic production (and reproduction), the man in market work† (Oppeheimer 1997). As the economy grows and wages rise, womens market work in turn also rises. For Becker, this means that the work women engage in becomes less specialized and more economically independent â€Å"leading, in turn, to a decline in the desirability of marrying or of staying married† (Oppenheimer 1997). Of particular concern to Oppenheimer is Beckers argument that a ‘major gain to marriage is lost through womens economic independence. Oppenheimer, however, calls into question several facets of Beckers theory by arguing that families are adaptable and have placed both women and children in the wor kforce when it was demanded by particular economic conditions. Oppenheimer stresses, through the employment of micro and marco level analyses, how the decline in male economic opportunity in the 1970s and 1980s served as an integral factor in reducing the supply of marriageable men. This parallels both Loughrans and Easterlins (Birth and Fortune, 1987) arguments that individuals (both men and women) are more likely to be married in the areas in which higher proportions of men are ‘marriageable (for Loughran this notion hinges on wage inequality and for Easterlin it rests on the particulars of the birth cohort). Oppenheimer further deviates from many of her predecessors by stressing the relative importance uncertainty in career entry and path plays in the delay of marriage. Couples would thus spend a greater amount of time (the concept of delaying marriage as opposed to nonmarriage is again stressed) when searching for suitable (as defined by men and women with an established career path) partners. Loughran, in â€Å"The Effect of Male Wage Inequality on Female Age at First Marriage† argues that â€Å"rising male wage inequality is responsible for a proportion of the decline in the age-specific propensity to marry between 1970 and 1990† (2002). The author, who also uses a search-theoretic framework, discusses how his hypothesis fits naturally into a model of female marital search (2002) and how it â€Å"reveals a negative correlation between male wage inequality and female propensity to marry.† That is, â€Å"if women search among a pool of men characterized by their wages, theory predicts growing male wage inequality will increase the duration of female marital search and, hence, age at first marriage† (2002). As similarly noted by Oppenheimer, Loughran agrees that modeling marriage behavior in this way shows that it is less of a ‘decline in marriage as it is of a ‘delay. Loughran, in a similar vein as Oppenheimer, dispels alternative h ypotheses such as rising female wages and employment and concludes that the rising male wage inequality increases the return to marital search, which in turn lengthens â€Å"search duration and decreas(es) age-specific propensities to marry† (2002). When comparing the theories of Oppenheimer and Loughran, one can see that the latters economic analysis supports the formers on several key points. One of Loughrans hypotheses deals with describing how wage inequality (beginning in the early 1970s) meant greater variability in the economic suitability and stability of potential husbands thereby leading to greater rewards for women who extended and prolonged their marriage search. This notion supports Oppenheimers emphasis on taking the stress away from womens independence as the critical factor in changing age of marriage and instead placing it on the declining role of males in the marketplace. Criticisms of these theories are bound to occur, as they fail to account for all of the intricacies associated with marriage trends. It is interesting to note the relative absence in the discussions presented by these authors of the importance of religion and its particular influence on marriage trends. When one considers the very nature of marriage, and the values and ideals it is naturally associated with, the idea of its close relationship with religious belief becomes easily noticeable. As such, it may be interesting in the future to examine these theories with respect to groups that have different levels of religiosity. When considering both of these theories, it becomes clear that the economic opportunity of both men and women should be studied together if one is interested in discovering the reasons behind change in marriage age. While neither the growing wage inequality among young men nor the independence among young women is wholly responsible for the delay in marriage, they are both seen to be important contributors to the phenomena and overall debate. Oppenheimer, in particular, has proven to be influential in influencing the direction of the discourse by calling into question some of the key prevailing notions which have persisted throughout the past century. References: 1.) Easterlin, R. A. (1987) Birth and Fortune: The impact of Numbers on Personal Welfare. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, second edition 2.) Oppenheimer, V.K. (1997) Womens employment and the gain to marriage: the specialization and trading model. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 431-453 3.) Oppenheimer, V.K. (1988) A theory of marriage timing. American Journal of Sociology, 94(3), 563-591 4.) Oppenheimer, V.K. (1994) Womens rising employment and the future of the family in industrial societies. Population and Development Review, 20(2), 293-342 5.) Loughran, D.S. (2002). The effect of male wage inequality on female age at first marriage. Review of Economics and Statistics, 84(2), 237-250.

Sexist Views in The Bacchae :: Bacchae Essays

Sexist Views in The Bacchae Throughout my life, I've heard the phrases, "Women shouldn't serve in the Armed Forces; no, I wouldn't want a female president; a woman's place is in the home." Even though our society is drifting from these extremely sexist views, opinions like these are still widely held. Women were mistreated much the same in the ancient Greek civilizations. The views of our society, regarding the social and sexual roles of women, are mirrored in the ancient Greek tragedy, The Bacchae. The idea that a woman's place is in the home is all too common in our culture, just take into consideration the Southern Baptist Convention's declaration stating wives must be submissive to their husbands. This belief was held strongly in the Greek civilization as well. A woman's function was to bear and raise children, cook, clean and care for any other needs the family may have. They weren't entitled to the basic freedoms they deserved. This intolerant view was illustrated in The Bacchae when Pentheus, in a rage, was ranting on about how all the women have deserted their homes to run wild through the dark woods on the mountain (pg 19, ln 17). The imagery associated with the woods is black and evil, yet when Pentheus speaks of the home, he claims the women have "deserted," as if they were wrongfully leaving their duty. Obviously, he believes the home is the proper place for a woman. Another very common misconception about women is that they were created for the pleasure of man. The idea that a woman's body was not her own, merely a possession to be dominated by her master as he wished, is also present in The Bacchae. The instances where the Maenads drank themselves into insensibility then crawled into the bushes to lie down before lusting men shows what lack of control these women had over their bodies. They were continuously dominated by the male god, Dionysus, and the fact that noone spoke against this behavior as being morally wrong only supports the idea that women are objects. It's absurd viewpoints like these that lead to modern day rape and sexual abuse. Yes, the sexist views demonstrated in The Bacchae belittle the social and sexual roles of woman, and yes, they may be reflected in our society today, but I do believe we're progressing above those close-minded, ignorant ways of thinking.

protein domains :: essays research papers

Describe the Nature, Structure, and Function of Domains in Proteins Domains "Within a single subunit [polypeptide chain], contiguous portions of the polypeptide chain frequently fold into compact, local semi-independent units called domains." - Richardson, 1981 In the hierarchial organisation of proteins, domains are found at the highest level of tertiary structure. Since the term was first used by Wetlaufer (1973) a number of definitions exist reflecting author bias, however all of the definitions agree that domains are independently folding compact units. Domains are frequently coded by exons and therefore have specific functionality. Among the many descriptions of protein domains the two most striking and simple are " Protein evolutionary units" and "Basic currency of Proteins". Domains may be considered to be connected units, which are to varying extents independent in terms of their structure, function and folding behaviour. Each domain can be described by its fold. While some proteins consist of a single domain, others consist of several or many. A number of globular protein chains consist of two or three domains appearing as 'lobes'. In other cases the domains may be of very different nature- for example some proteins located in cell membranes have a globular intracellular or extracellular domain distinct from that which spans the membrane. Protein domains occur in large polypeptides, (proteins that have more than 200 residues). These proteins have two or more globular clusters which in turn have domains composed of 100-200 amino acids. Thus many domains are structurally independent units that have the characteristics of small globular proteins. If we examine the detailed structures of many transmembrane proteins, we see that they often have three different domains, two hydrophilic and one hydrophobic .(fig 1&2) A hydrophilic domain (consisting of hydrophilic amino acids) at the N-terminus pokes out in the extracellular medium, a hydrophobic domain in the middle of the amino acid chain, often only 20-30 amino acids long, is threaded through the plasma membrane, and a hydrophilic domain at the C-terminus protrudes into the cytoplasm. The transmembrane domain, because it is made of amino acids having hydrophobic side chains, exists comfortably in the hydrophobic inner layers of the plasma membrane. Because these transmembrane domains anchor many proteins in the lipid bilayer, these proteins are not free-floating and cannot be isolated and purified biochemically without first dissolving away the lipid bilayer with detergents. (Indeed, much of the washing we do in our lives is necessitated by the need to solubilize proteins that are embedded in lipid membranes using detergents!)

The Impact of Restoration Comedy on Theatre :: European History

The Impact of Restoration Comedy on Theatre Shortly after the glory days of Elizabethan and Jacobean theatre, a Puritanical movement led by Oliver Cromwell gained control of Parliament. Cromwell ethics did not extend to cover the moral extravagance of theatre. Under the guise of public health and safety, Parliament ordered the closing of all theatres on September 2, 1642. Such dirty public areas were the perfect breeding ground for the spreading of plague. Actors were left with two options, join Charles I in the civil war against Cromwell, or defy the law and continue performing. Then, in 1649, Charles lost his head, establishing the new Commonwealth. In 1653, Cromwell disbanded Parliament and named himself Lord High Protector. During these days of political chaos, a new underground theater evolved. This new theatre was an extremely risky venture. Any actor caught performing would be imprisoned. Box office receipts would be confiscated for the Commonwealth. Enormous fines would be levied against any daring to sit in an audience. Entire playhouses would be destroyed, their interiors gutted or exteriors burned. Theatre faced extinction. It became an obsequious art, catering to Cromwell's strict moral code. Killigrew would survive, and eventually form the Theatre Royal, but he lived in constant fear. Davenant worked through legal channels to produce theatre Cromwell could not dispute. His pieces were simple, more opera then play, and propaganda for the Commonwealth. Interestingly, the first woman to appear on the British stage did so in this time, in Davenant's The Siege of Rhodes. He began pushing the envelope, uncomfortable in his new sycophantic role. He renewed his ties to the British aristocracy, exiled to France. He befriended Charles II, and when the young king made his triu mphant return to power, Davenant was given the monopoly on all theatre in London. He shared this power with his old friend Thomas Killigrew. Under their guidance, the theatre exploded back into being. Those who had remained in England during the Commonwealth had faced years of strict moral repression. Those who fled to France had acquired some of the decadence bred across the channel. In combination, these two forces created a nation of wealthy, witty, amoral hedonists. Their theatre reflected their lifestyles. Thus was born the Restoration Tragedy and the Comedy of Manners. The tragedies were broad, sweeping tales of great heroism. The aristocracy liked to picture themselves in these far off lands, being oh so noble and eloquent.

Economics Book Critique Essay

Paul Rubin began his preface by stating that tabula rasa should no longer be viewed as something credible. Rubin maintained his conclusion that evolutionary biology would eventually be the foundation of all social sciences. He maintained that the fundamental taste for liberty is a genetic legacy from the hunter-gatherer bands in the history of mankind. He stated, â€Å"I reach a surprising conclusion: modern western nations, and particularly the United States, are the most effective societies for satisfying our evolved political preferences† (Paul, p. x) Rubin’s attitude’s towards liberty is the one which cost me a great deal of apprehension, in spite of the fact that it is not brought up much in the book. Although I enjoyed reading the book, the fact that so little has been said regarding freedom, I believe, ought to be a cause of serious apprehension. In regard of the contended predominance of Rubin’s concentration on the biological foundation which lies beneath the current state of human liberty, he should have considered beginning with animal freedom as articulated by, say, Pavlov on the â€Å"freedom-reflexes†. The foundation of Rubin’s opinion appears to be a firm certainty that human control and freedom are polar opposites. In fact on his Preface he claimed that when he began the research he was still a libertarian and thus he does not understand much of government’s constant rules regarding human behavior. He stated, â€Å"I have not used evolutionary analysis to prove points in which I already believed† (Paul, p. xv). I was quite bewildered upon reading this remark especially since his declarations seems to exhibit an absolute lack of understanding regarding the vital social control as well as counter-control procedures. It also showed a black void of nearly enormous quantities in awareness of the huge body of literature which could be dated back from the founders of civilization. Rubin feelingly asserted â€Å"There are substantial benefits from limiting government power and great dangers from allowing it to increase. It is, therefore, a puzzle, to explain why so many seek to increase the power of government† (Paul, p. 134). His statement seems to be a little naive. Rubin admitted that most normal individual’s desires governments to do pretty much more than defend them from dishonest dealers, banks, and the like. Most citizens knows the danger of the profound corruption from financial organizations and this is the reason why it is not really much a â€Å"puzzle† why they want to increase government power. The same could be said with the world’s third world countries with weak economies. They look for international kind of government in order for the mistreatment of other advanced countries to be limited if not stopped altogether. The book Professor Rubin wrote is interesting in spite of the fact that I do not agree much with the things he mentioned there particularly on the issue of freedom. Professor Rubin’s, Professor of Economics, attitude towards society and liberty appears to intentionally shun the standard control terminology. He talks a great deal of power, and acquiescence in separate terms of dominant, counter dominant, and the like instead of using the standard terms such as social control and counter control. There are no discussions regarding socialization, customs, introjections of values, punishments, and the like. Overall, I view Professor Rubin’s work to be stimulating particularly because he have some unique views of his own which made me think mentally and allowed me to exercise my faculty of reason. Although I do not agree much with the things he claims, I could still say that his book was an interesting read as well as thought provoking and for these reasons I recommend this book to everyone.