Leadership and Management Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Leadership and Management - Research Paper Example All the complaints, problems and official liabilities of the nursing department have to be sorted by the chief nursing officer. Chief nursing officer must possess appropriate leadership skills because of the challenging demands that exist in working environment on daily basis. There are grave issues that take place in the health facilities like nursing staff deficiencies, human errors, life losses and patient dilemmas. Chief nursing officer has to make sure that the workflow of the health facility remains smooth and sound (Hader, 2011). Chief nursing officers are kind of leaders that are responsible for creating a special kind of patient care culture at the workplace so that the nurses working under him can know the fact that their main duty is to serve the needy patients whole heartedly. If the culture is based on human services and care then there will be really less issues and depleted problems. As a leader the chief nursing officers has to lead the nursing team and set examples. Chief nursing officer is responsible for creating cultures that support acts of courage and bravery in nursing. The American Organization of Nurse Executives has given a code of conduct to develop a good and groomed culture at the health care facilities (American Nurses Association, 2001). ... If the chief nursing officer will not show courage to take necessary and bold action, then there is a huge probability that the health care facility will not remain reliable in the eyes of the masses and overall organizational requirements of the hospital or health care facility will never be achieved. Corley (2002) described the ‘courage to take action’ in a morally declined society and stressful environments like that of any hospital as the most important factor in leading any health care environment. The nurses are normally over worked and inter-departmental conflicts occur on regular basis. CNO should be courageous enough to speak on behalf of the nurses and tell the upper hierarchies about the real needs of patients. Buresh and Gordon (2006) have argued that nurses must feel that the chief nursing officer is really working on their behalf and their voice is getting the appropriate outlet. Courage, conviction, and capacity to work in an adaptive way are the must have qualities of the chief nursing officers Chief nursing officers have the sole responsibility to make sure that patient care standards, clinical requirements and health standards are met at the health facility. He is accountable for any type of problems in the nursing department. Chief nursing officer has the duty to motivate, train and control the nursing staff and inculcate the fact in them that their main duty is to serve the patients. Any type of human error resulting in loss of human life or injury can cause detrimental effects to the health organization or hospital. The chief nursing officer just cannot issue orders and do nothing rather leadership and managerial

E-Business In Practice Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

E-Business In Practice - Essay Example This paper begins with conducting market analysis of e-books and e-readers. It then proceeds to evaluate the needs of customers with regards to e-books and e-readers. Further, the paper continues to analyse the disruptive effect of this technology to the publishing industry’s value chain. Finally, the paper conducts a strategic analysis of the future direction of this market and makes recommendations for conventional publishers to undertake in order to remain competitive in future.   This paper highlights that books are big business. According to PwC in 2009 people globally spent $108 billion on books. Already, readers in the twenty-first century use an increasing amount of electronic texts in the form of e-mails, web pages, text-messages, online catalogues, databases and e-newspapers. E-books are a natural extension to this move towards electronic text. In the United States the Association of American publishers reported revenues of   $969.9 million in 2011 for e-books excluding the religious category and sales from smaller, independent publishers. In Europe, the e-book and e-reader market is still in its infancy though it holds promise, especially in the UK, which stands to benefit from the extensive range of English-language e-books available.  The growth of e-books in the UK is expected to be driven by two factors: the proliferation of multifunctional devices, such as tablets and smartphones that can be used to access e-books, and the rising importance of the electronic special interest book market.  

The Marketing Research Discussions and the Understanding of the Paper

The Marketing Discussions and the Understanding of the Marketing Mix Concept - Research Paper Example Research is the amalgamation of data that has been taken over a period of time. It takes into account the qualitative as well as the quantitative details which are pursued a particular area of study and hence the results are envisaged only after the research has been completed. Research is a fact-finding exercise and it requires extensive planning and allocation of much-needed resources on the part of the researching party. The purpose of research is to seek answers that are raised in the wake of different queries and questions. The problems are solved after data is gained with the help of different tools and methodologies which come under the research heading. There are two different research methodologies - the primary research and the secondary research, both of which require the extensive finding of data and knowledge on the researcher's part. The primary research methods include sampling through questionnaires, survey methods, and one-on-one interviews. The questionnaires could be open-ended where there is room for respondents to spell out as much information as needed or these could be close-ended where the respondents are tied to certain answers from which they need to choose. These could also be mixed ended - having a combination of open-ended and close-ended questions and queries. The survey could be through interviews and questionnaires. This is basically a case of quantitative research where quantities and figures could be tabulated rather than quality which is judged through the use of secondary research methods. The secondary research methods include the usage of books, journals, websites, encyclopedia and other related information and knowledge which have already been sorted out and has been documented for pretty much the same purposes.Both primary and secondary pieces of research are used in unison so that the whole process of carrying out research is backed up with a solid basis of evidence and proof. The quantitative methods of marketing resear ch include the approaches that basically compute numbers and data, not concerning with the quality of the input which is being collected and rather focusing on the sheer quantity.  

African Americans Roles In The Revolutionary War History Essay

African Americans Roles In The Revolutionary War History Essay At the time of the Revolutionary War, the African American population in the colonies was approximately 500,000, which was about 20 percent of the total population. The history of the military roles of African Americans in the War for Independence is one that was rarely acknowledged until several decades after the war was over. The documents detailing how many African American men served, whether they were free or slave, where they served, and what their duties were are incomplete. What research has shown is telling about the culture of the time period and especially telling about the better part of the century that followed. It is difficult to estimate the number of African Americans who fought for both the Continental Army and the British Royal Army. The numbers people get are a general estimate given by what was actually documented and what historians have acquired through analysis of letters, diaries, and similar sources. African Americans participated in the War for Independence from the beginning to its conclusion, they did so in hopes that the freedoms their white counterparts would gain would also apply to them. Even though many knew that would not be the case they still fought praying that one day their efforts then would get them freedom. The right to fight was given and taken away at several points throughout the war. However, when African Americans were granted the right to fight, those willing to fight were never in short supply. Historians have estimated that at least 5,000 black soldiers fought for independence during the Revolutionary War. Among those African Americans that fought for independence would have undoubtedly been Crispus Attucks, a runaway slave living in Massachusetts in 1770. However, years before the first shots of the Revolution were fired, on March 5, 1770, five people were shot and killed, including Crispus Attucks, at the hands of the British Royal Army during what became known as the Boston Massacre. Just over a month before the first shots of the war were fired, on March 5, 1775, Dr. Joseph Warren spoke about the Boston Massacre and how the ideology of liberty was not only thought by whites but by all people: That personal freedom is the natural right of every man, and that property, or exclusive right to dispose of what he has honestly acquired by his own labor, necessarily arises therefrom, are truths which common sense has placed beyond the reach of contradiction. And no man, or body of men, can, without being guilty of flagrant injustice, claim a right to dispose of the persons or acquisitions of any other man or body of men, unless it can be proved that such a right has arisen from some compact between the parties, in which it has been explicitly and freely granted.  [1]   However, it must be noted that Dr. Joseph Warren was from Massachusetts, a hotbed for Patriots and also where only four percent of the population was African American.  [2]  Yet even in Massachusetts the legislature agreed to reject all African Americans from enlisting when the chances of an uprising occurring were extremely slight. Connecticut and Rhode Island followed suit and agreed to reject African Americans, at least for the first years of war.  [3]   For the first part of the war, many citizens operated under the ideology of staying true to their prejudices rather than realizing the practicality of using African American soldiers. Prejudice towards African Americans came from many citizens, including the President George Washington. Early on in George Washingtons life he believed that white blood not only lightened the skin but enlightened the mind, and he preferred to employ yellow-skinned servants within his home.  [4]  Unfortunately, his beliefs mirrored that of many others in the area. Others saw African Americans as savages, and as property so how could they possibly fight alongside actual people?  [5]  On the other side of the coin there were people who saw African Americans as humans but with the conflict at hand taking up so much energy, they did not believe that it was the time to discuss slavery which could cause fighting among the states. Regrettably, that divisive issue only gave the British a leg up in the co nflict. Even though remaining true to ones prejudices was widely practiced, it never stopped African Americans from wanting to fight for the cause. African Americans fought on both sides for many of the same reasons. Freedom was the number one driving factor for the African American slave in which side they fought for, either the Continental or Royal Army. Free African Americans, at times, were recruited but many chose to enlist. African American men, free or enslaved, chose which side to fight on based on what each side offered. The side was chosen by who offered them a better life after the war in many cases. In Massachusetts, the Committee of Safety reported to the Provincial Congress in May 1775 that à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ Admission of any persons but freemen as soldiers would be inconsistent with principles being supported and would reflect dishonor on the colony.  [6]  That report, however, made no mention of what they would do with free African Americans. However, when George Washington was given command of the troops around Boston, he issued orders to recruiting officers that prohibited enlistment of any Negro. à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ In the Continental Congress in September 1775, Edward Rutledge of South Carolina demanded that Washington discharge all blacksà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦but failed to receive the necessary votes from other representatives.  [7]  On October 8, 1775, the Council of War convened to discuss several issues concerning the Continental Army. Those in the council included such men as Commander in Chief, George Washington, several Major-Generals: Ward, Lee, and Putnam, as well as many Brigadier-Generals: Thomas, Spencer, Heath, Sullivan, Green, and Gates. Among the issues discussed was whether or not to allow African Americans to enlist or re-enlist in the Continental Army, and if they were to allow them to do so, would free men as well as slaves be allowed to enlist. The councils decision: Agreed, unanimously, to reject all slaves, and, by a great majority, to reject Negroes altogether.  [8]  However, there were some dissenting opinions in the council, as was the case with General Thomas. In a letter from General Thomas to John Adams, written in the same month the Council of War convened, Thomas wrote: We have some negroes; but I look on them, in general, as equally serviceable with other men for fatigue; and in action many of them have proved themselves brave.  [9]  Approximately twenty days later, George Washington issued a General Order stating: Any person therefore (Negroes excepted, which the Congress do not incline to inlist again) coming with a proper Order and will subscribe the Inlistment, shall be immediately supplied.  [10]  Again, on November 12, 1775, Washington issued another General Order to make sure all recruiters were aware of his previous decision. The Order stated: Neither Negroes, Boys unable to bare Arms, nor old men unfit to endure the fatigues of the campaign, are to be inlisted.  [11]   Several whites in the Southern colonies held a deep opposition to African Americans (free or enslaved) enlisting in the Continental Army, because they feared the idea of them being armed. Whites in the South also feared armed African American men because of the possibility of a slave rebellion and the possibility of losing their slaves which they saw as property. The British Royal Governor, Lord Dunmore of Virginia, readily saw the weakness in the colonies of slaveholders in the South. In November 1775, he issued a proclamation stating: I do, in virtue of the power and authority to me given, by his majesty, determine to execute martial law, and cause the same to be executed throughout this colony; and to the end that peace and good order may the sooner be restored, I do require every person capable of bearing arms, to resort to his majestys standard, or be looked upon as traitors to his majestys crown and government, and thereby become liable to the penalty the law inflicts upon such offencesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ And I do hereby further declare all indentured servants, negroes, or others (appertaining to rebels) free, that are able and willing to bear arms, they joining his majestys troops as soon as may be, for the more speedily reducing this colony to a proper sense of their duty to his majestys crown and dignityà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦.  [12]   Lord Dunmore promised freedom to any slave of anyone the Majesty would consider a rebel. However, similar to the colonies, allowing African Americans to enlist in the British Royal Army was not completely unanimous. Many of the free or runaway African Americans who had joined the loyalists, at least those who had not already died, were discharged from their positions. However, a month and a half after Washingtons General Order was issued and Lord Dunmores game changing proclamation was issued, Washington wrote a letter to the President of Congress, John Hancock: It has been represented to me, that the free Negroes who have served in this Army, are very much dissatisfied at being discarded. As it is to be apprehended that they may seek employ in the Ministerial Army, I have presumed to depart from the Resolution respecting them and have given licence for their being enlisted, If this is disapproved by Congress I shall put a stop to it.  [13]   In September of 1776, the Continental Congress required states to come up with 88 battalions to assist the Continental Army. At that point their resources where almost completely exhausted and when the Continental Congress requested another 16 battalions, recruiting African American became a crucial necessity. The Revolutionary War set a precedent for allowing African Americans to enlist or be recruited only in times of dire need. As the war went on officers easily recognized the need to enlist African Americans, otherwise their troops would continue to dwindle and that would ultimately mean the war would be lost to the Tories. Clearly, that was not an option. African Americans, for the most part, took on the beliefs of the cause as their own. Just because the color of their skin was different did not mean they did not believe in liberty, quite the contrary in fact. Lemuel Haynes, a free African American man from New England, who was also one the minutemen at Lexington and Concord, wrote to Congress in 1776 on the matter of liberty. In his letter, Haynes writes: To affirm, that an Englishman has a right to his Liberty, is a truth which has Been so clearly Evinced, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ But I query, whether Liberty is so contracted a principle as to be Confind to any nation under Heaven; nay, I think it not hyperbolical to affirm, that Even and affrican, has Equally as good a right to his Liberty in common with Englishmenà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ Consequently we may suppose, that what is precious to one man, is precious to another,à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ Therefore we may reasonably Conclude, that Liberty is Equally as precious to a Black man, as it is to a white one.  [14]   Haynes, like many other African American men, hoped that his faithful service to the Continental Army would prove to whites who were in disbelief that they, too, deserved the unalienable rights listed in the Declaration of Independence.  [15]  Haynes later went on to become the first African American clergymen to be formally ordained, as well as marry a white woman and have nine children.  [16]   African Americans experienced greater racial equality while serving in the Continental Navy than they did while serving in the army. That being the case, many African American men served in the navy during the Revolutionary War, doing so for several reasons. The ever present manpower shortages of the time, not only on land but also at sea, caused both the Continental Navy and Royal Navy to enlist African Americans into the navy. Different from the Continental Army, the Navy recruited both free and enslaved African American from the start of the war. The Navy did this mostly because they were in need of sailors, no matter what color they were. To both the enslaved and free, privately owned ships were more attractive than the Continental or state navies. For runaway slaves, there was less chance of being caught, and in general, the pay was much better than the army. However, African Americans still served in and on both because the pay was good, being roughly equal to the pay for white sailors. Not only was the pay generally equal, the majority of the Navies ships had crews that were integrated.  [17]  On ships African Americans gratefully accepted roles whites were not willing to accept. Some of their duties included cooking, cleaning, managing the ships sails, mending any damages the ship sustained in battles.  [18]  However, there were also African American sailors that served in marine units from Pennsylvania and Connecticut for example, and as ship pilots, mainly coming from Maryland and Virginia.  [19]   The First Rhode Island regiment à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ Peter Salem was born into slavery; however, one of his owners freed him so he could enlist in the Continental Army.  [20]  He became one of the Minutemen; he fought at Concord, Bunker Hill where he was credited for firing the shot that killed a British Major, Saratoga, and Stony Point. (CITE) Salem Poor who was born free, is another excellent example of bravery and willingness to fight on the part of African Americans. Salem Poor fought at Bunker Hill where he shot a British Lieutenant. It was there at Bunker Hill where Poor earned the respect of several white officers who stated: That a negro called Salem Poor, of Col. Fryes regiment, Capt. Ames company, in the late battle at Charlestown, behaved like an experienced officer, as well as an excellent soldier, to set forth particulars of his conduct would be tedious, we only beg leave to say, in the person of this said negro centers a brave and gallant soldier. The reward due to so great and distinguished a character, we submit to Congress.  [21]   Without a doubt there are many other stories expressing great examples of gallantry and courage from African Americans that served in the Revolutionary War, unfortunately, the color of their skin, at the time, dictated what and how much was documented about them. Public acknowledgment for their service to the country did not come out until well over half a century after the war had concluded and while another war was in full swing. The Army and Navy Journal published an article in September of 1863 on Negro Soldiers in the Revolution. The article stated: The record is clear, that from the beginning to the conclusion of the war of the Revolution, Negroes served in the Continental armies with intelligence, courage, and steadfastness; and that important results in several instances are directly traceable to their good conduct.  [22]   For their service in the military, only a few African Americans received some kind of acknowledgment. The great majority, even though serving their country with courage and bravery, stayed out of the spotlight. Without the participation of African Americans in the Revolutionary War, especially on the side of the Patriots, the outcome may have been drastically different. African American soldiers of the Revolution served with the same bravery and courage as their white brothers. They served that way even knowing that they might not be able to enjoy the freedoms over which the war was fought.

Jane Eyre :: essays research papers

In the two stories, Jane Eyre and The Yellow Wallpaper, the main characters are faced with various encounters with authority. Jane and the Narrator are the central characters that are faced with these authority figures, and an external as well as an internal relationship is developed with the figures that have power over them. These two women also display a unique use of authority to benefit themselves at various points in the stories. Jane and the Narrator are first alike in the way that they outwardly express their feelings about the situations they are in by the use of actions and words. This open, verbal communication with these figures in their lives is a common trait between them, but what differs is that Jane's communication is positive (she gets her feelings in the open and is understood) and the Narrator never gets listened to. The second similarity between Jane and the Narrator is the inner attitude that they feel about the figures of authority. This attitude is present in both characters as the reader sees their inner thoughts and feelings as well as the words and actions that take place when the authority figures are not around. The last criterion that is common to both Jane and the Narrator is that each woman gains a power of authority near the end of their story. What differs between the two is how they go about possessing the authority, and how they use it when they finally have it. The end result is made up of similarities between the two women's characteristics, but differences in the way that they use those characteristics in their lives. The novel Jane Eyre is about a young girl who goes through her life struggling with various life issues. Jane encounters people that treat her with little respect, the feeling of being trapped in situations that she is not happy in, and learning how to grow up as a poor girl who has to make all of her own decisions without any help.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  A significant starting point in the novel Jane Eyre is at her arrival at Thornfield, and her meeting with Mr. Rochester. At that estate Jane is employed as the governess of a small child named Adele. At this point in Jane’s life, she is learning what it is like to be a paid subordinate under a master. This proves to be a good learning experience for Jane, and as the character of Rochester goes on to shape her life as she stays there, Jane learns and grows along with her feelings.

Australia the Movie: Synopsis, History and Comparisons

In Australia, an aboriginal medicine man/witch doctor, King George was teaching a young aborigine named Nullah how to do various tasks in the Outback. When all of the sudden a group white men shoot King George with an arrow. Then, Nullah rides home on his horse to his home in Faraway Downs. He hears people coming and is scared that someone will take him away from his family, so he goes into hiding. However, the voices he hears and people he sees are Drover and Sarah. The property of Faraway Downs is Sarah’s and her husband’s. When Sarah goes into her property she finds that her husband has been killed and he is lying dead across a table. Because of this Sarah decides she wants to sell her property to the Carney Empire. However, if Faraway Downs is sold, the company will have a monopoly over the cattle business. Sarah soon finds out from Nullah that Carney is stealing her cattle and driving them across the river. Soon after she hears the news she fires Fletcher (the current driver for her cattle) and hires Drover to drive in their 1,500 cattle. They need 7 people in all to successfully drive them all in so, Sarah, Nullah, his mother and grandmother, and an aborigine named Magarri offer their help. They could still use one more person but no others are willing or capable. Then one morning the police appear at the house and are looking for Nullah and his mother who are hidden in the water tower. Sadly, his mother drowns in the tower because the tank filled up when one of the men used the faucet to cool down. Now Nullah is motherless so Sarah decides to give it a shot and raise him herself. She does not do a wonderful job of this because she does not have any children of her own. Fletcher creates a stampede by lighting the brush on fire and has the cows heading towards a cliff. Some fall off the cliff but many cows were saved because Nullah resorted to song and magic to stop the cattle. Fletcher is attempting to hurt their cattle and destroy their plans on saving Faraway Downs by killing cattle, burning items and poisoning waterholes. At a ball Carney attempts to convince Sarah to sell Faraway Downs to him. However, she refuses and tells him that it is no longer for sale. A few days later Fletcher pushes Carney into water where an alligator attacked and killed him. Also, Nullah goes missing. But Drover believes he is safe and protected by King George. Unfortunately they are not safe and are caught by the police where Nullah is sent to the mission and King George is put in jail. There is a treat of war in the city of Darwin so the town is being evacuated. Sarah searches for Nullah and can hear his singing but cannot find him. He is being sent to another island to work on a mission. While Sarah is working at an Army radio headquarters Japanese planes bomb the headquarters and the building catches on fire. Also, the jail is hit and King George escapes. Drover thinks Sarah has died and rescues Nullah and the other children from the explosion on the island. Sarah survives the explosion and is reunited with her love, Drover and Nullah. Afterwards, they return safely to their farm and all survive the explosions and save their cattle from Carney and Fletcher. Australia History During the 1930’s Germany was expanding its territory and in 1939 they threatened to invade Poland. Germany decided to disobey Britain and France when they told Germany that they would declare war if Poland was invaded. The Australian people do not approve of the German expansion and because they are a British nation they were pulled into the war along with Britain (www. nzacday. org). Australia declared war on Germany on September 3, 1939 and joined the war in Europe to aid its Allies in the United Kingdom (www. worldwariihistory. com). Australia was forced to make a tough decision: to watch after homeland in case Japan attempted to expand its power, or send troops to aid England in the war. Because Japan pledged its neutrality and the British naval base in Singapore would stop any Japanese invasions towards Australia, they decided to commit itself to the European War. Australian troops were not prepared to fight and risk their lives in war. This caused he Royal Australian Navy to be put under British control. They began to train and recruit men and they helped the Royal Air Force in the war against Germany (www. anzacday. org). During 1940 and 1941 troops in Australia helped capture Bardia and Tobruk in Libya because they saw action in North Africa and the Middle East. Once Japan bombed Pearl Harbor and the war was brought closer to Australian homeland, Australia declared war on Japan. The most direct threat that Australia faced was New Guinea. Thankfully, the Americans held off a naval attack on Australia at the Battle of the Coral Sea in May 1942. By the end of WWII, Australia has lost about 30,000 men and women (www. worldwariihistory. com). Also, the Indigenous people of Australia were driven out by the British and many were killed and driven out of their homes. The deaths of aborigines occurred because of the diseases spread by Europeans, the introduction of domestic animals destroyed many natural habitats and fighting in Tasmania. During the early 20th century laws were passed to segregate and protect aborigines. This caused restrictions on where they could live, and work. Families were also broken up (www. australianexplorer. com). Also, during WWII aborigines under the age of five were taken from their homes by white men and sent to live with white families. The British did this because the Australian government thought their race lacked a solid future. The children were never reunited with their families (http://history. howstuffworks. com). Unfortunately after WWII the British wanted to ‘Europeanize’ them. In this case all rights were taken away from the aborigines. During the 1960’s, the aborigines were given citizenship status but in 1972 they were given limited rights to their own land (www. australianexplorer. com). Australia Analysis During World War II in the 1930’s and 1940’s there are many similarities and differences in Australia the movie compared to the country’s real history. A similarity between history and Hollywood is that they both go into great detail on how horribly the British treated the aborigines of Australia. A difference between the two was how little detail the movie Australia went into when it came down to the war itself and its allies. Throughout the movie the director, Baz Luhrmann does not focus on the key points of the outcome of WWII, the disaster and hardship it put on Australia, and the effects on its people and cities. A similarity of the treatment of aborigines is that in the movie the aborigines were taken away from their families and homes. This was known as the Stolen Generation in Australia. During the movie they were sent away to work on missions on different islands and were rarely seen again by their families. Although this did occur in reality the children were mainly forcefully sent or tricked into living with a white family. The parents were sometimes unaware that their children were even still alive. The government would often tell them their child had died. Where in reality they are living with a white family so they have a chance at a better future. A difference between the movie Australia and reality is how little detail Baz Luhrmann displays on the actual war itself. Throughout the entire movie except for the end, the main idea is focused on cattle and the Stolen Generation. However during the end, WWII begins to take place and the movie displays the war aspect. It does not explain how the war began, the final result, or the results on Australian people. The war began in Germany because they tried to expand their territory into Poland. France and Britain declared war and because Australia was British territory they also joined in the fight. The movie did include when Japan attacked close to Australia at Pearl Harbor, which caused them to go to war against each other. By the end WWII Australia lost about 30,000 men and women.

Consequentalist Theory Applied to the Practice of Interrogative Torture

Consequentalist Theory Applied to the Practice of Interrogative Torture Free Online Research Papers To many Americans, the word torture may conjure up images of the Dark Ages, with black hooded torturers applying their craft in dank, dark dungeons. If the practice is associated with modern times, it is assumed that it is something that only an under developed country would engage in. Unfortunately, this topic has become more relevant to our own society in recent years. It has become an issue that can impact national security. Since the attacks of September 11th, we have had to question just how far should we go to obtain intelligence about future attacks. Thesis We now have to decide if the use of torture is an acceptable means to obtain this information. If we decide that this is an appropriate path to take, then how can we apply the practice in a morally acceptable fashion? By relating different forms of moral thought to this debate, I hope to show that the use of torture to extract information from terrorists might be justified using a consequentalist form of moral thought. Background Although America had experienced terror incidents in the past, the attacks of September 11th heightened public awareness of the threat and underscored the need for preventative measures to be taken (Combs, 2003, p. 276). Prior to September 11th, the terrorist group al-Qaeda claimed responsibility for attacks against the World Trade Center in 1993, US embassies in Kenya and Nairobi in 1998 and the USS Cole in 2000 (Combs, 2003, p. 67). Post 9/11 attacks by Al-Qaeda in Bali and London established this organization’s vitality and only reinforced the fear that many Americans felt about the possibility of future attacks on our homeland. The terrorist organization al-Qaeda remains a real threat to national security. Members of al-Qaeda are extremely dedicated terrorists who launch meticulously planned attacks, resulting in high casualties (Combs, 2003, p. 56). Owing to the War on Terror, we now have several high ranking al-Qaeda officials in custody. Naturally we should interrogate them, to learn more about their organization and to uncover plans for future attacks. How far we should take our interrogation is the matter up for debate. Al-Qaeda operatives can be classified as â€Å"Crusader† terrorists (Combs, 2003, p. 52). The crusader often believes he is serving a higher cause through terror, and has low expectations of survival in his quest. Not surprisingly, this type of person does not voluntarily disclose information that he feels will derail the mission of his organization. The information that he is not divulging, such as plans for a future attack or the location of a terrorist cell, can indeed be life saving for hundreds if not thousands of American citizens if the proper authorities become aware of it. A more emergent situation is called the â€Å"Ticking Bomb† scenario (Kennedy, 2003, p. 8). In this scenario, a detained terrorist is believed to know the location of a bomb that will cause many injures and deaths if it is not defused. With an understanding of terrorist ideology, we can expect that he is not likely to answer any questions. Is it appropriate to apply some physical coercion once conventional interrogation has failed? By analyzing several different forms of moral thought in the paragraphs that follow, I hope to illuminate some issues surrounding this debate. By doing so, hopefully the answer to the question I posed above will become clearer. Ethical Considerations Deontology When we examine the morality of interrogatory torture from a deontology standpoint, we need to look at principles or obligations that are associated with the action. For example, some might feel that we are obligated to uphold human rights, no matter the circumstances. If that were the case, then we would declare interrogative torture to be immoral. Although there may be disagreement among deontologists about what is obligatory, in general deontology places a high value on respecting human rights (Casebeer, pg. 3). Immanuel Kant provides some guidance as to how we can best extend this respect to others through his â€Å"categorical imperative†, in which he states that you should â€Å"Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, as an end, and never as a means only†(Casebeer, 2003, p. 3). We should not use another person to further our own agenda. Clearly torture violates Kantian respect, because not only are we using that person, but we are also inflicting pain as we do so. Undoubtedly a deontologist, who holds respect for others as the principle by which they gauge moral decisions, would condemn this action. Since deontologists do not always agree on what is obligatory, it is possible for there to be more than one viewpoint on a single issue. It all depends on what the individual holds as obligatory. For instance, in his paper Can Interrogatory Torture Be Morally Legitimate?, Kennedy stated: â€Å"One of the most fundamental and solemn obligations of the rulers of a nation is to protect the innocent† (p. 9). This is interesting because it shifts the obligation to the rulers. If we believe this to be true, then as average citizens we are really more concerned with the end results of intelligence gathering that will protect us, and not in the means with which the intelligence was collected. Virtue Theory When we talk about virtue in ethics, we are really talking about how we live our lives, and how others perceive us as we go about doing so. It is a measure of character. Aristotle talked about how humans strive for eudemonia, which translates to flourishing or proper functioning, essentially living a good life (Casebeer, 2003, p. 5),. How humans attain this is by exhibiting human excellences, or virtues such as honesty, compassion and kindness. Vices, such as anger, vengeance and violence, are those character traits that detract from the fundamental goodness that virtue theorists envision. It is not surprising then, that a virtue theorist would not be reconciled to justify torture under any circumstances. As Jeff Jacoby wrote in The Boston Globe in 2005: Torture is never worth it. Some things we don’t do, not because they never work, not because they aren’t â€Å"deserved†, but because our very right to call ourselves decent human beings depends in part on our not doing them. Torture is in that category (p. 2) I agree with the emphasis of this statement. Torture is truly abhorrent. I do believe that there is harm in becoming a nation that practices torture. I admire virtue ethicists, who feel encourage us to strive for human excellence. However, I feel that human excellence is an endpoint that is reached over time. The events of 9/11 did distract us from that end, but that’s what terrorism is supposed to do; it terrorizes. We need to overcome that, and endeavor to achieve that excellence. At the same time, we need to make sure our nation is not attacked in this way again. It is imperative that we ensure the safety of our citizens. It would indeed be wonderful if we could resolve our differences in a peaceful way, because that would exemplify virtue theory and move us closer to attaining excellence. However, that is not the way al-Qaeda does things. As a group they are not interested in bringing about peaceful solutions to the problems they perceive. Justice Viewing the debate from a justice standpoint would look at the fairness of interrogative torture. To evaluate justice in this circumstance, we would look at libertarian justice, or how the fairness of an action is determined through honoring agreements. In his 2002 article in the Philadelphia Inquirer, Mark Bowden wrote this about torture: â€Å" it would violate the U.S. Constitution, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights†(p. 1). By not honoring these agreements, the United States is not acting in a just manner. However, two paragraphs later, Bowden quoted philosophy professor Michael Levin: Torturing the terrorist is unconstitutional? Probably. But millions of lives certainly outweigh constitutionality. Torture is barbaric? Mass murder is more barbaric. Indeed, letting millions of innocents die in deference to one who flaunts his guilt is moral cowardice, an unwillingness to dirty one’s hands (Bowden, 2002, p. 1). We can acknowledge that there is a libertarian justice argument against torture. However, this argument may be invalidated when viewed relative to the enormous loss of life associated with a terror attack that could have been prevented. Allowing an attack to occur because of reluctance to violate the rights of a terrorist is not fair to the intended victims. By maximizing fairness for a large number of innocent citizens, it can be said that we are practicing utilitarian justice. Consequentalist Thought Consequentalism examines, as the name implies, consequences that are associated with ethical decisions. A consequentalist will consider the results of their actions in terms of benefit versus harm. The ends justify the means. When decisions are made in this manner, the goal is to maximize benefit and minimize harm in the end. One tool that can be useful in the decision making process is the harm/benefit ratio. John Stuart Mill’s â€Å"Greatest Happiness Principle† states that the right decision is the one that provides the greatest amount of happiness for all involved (Casebeer, 2003, p. 3). Happiness here can be interpreted as the presence of pleasure or the absence of pain. It is important to note that Mills was talking about everyone affected by the decision when he measures happiness. In the â€Å"Ticking Bomb† scenario, we would consider the happiness (or pain) felt by the terrorist. We would then apply these same measures to the intended victims. For example, if we fail to gain substantive information from our terrorist through interrogation, and choose to not pursue the information we seek with more force, the terrorist feels no pain. However, when the bomb goes off, that pain is borne by the victims, their families and even the Nation. By making the decision to not torture, we maximized pain for a large cohort of people, and maintained happiness for one. The result is a high harm/benefit ratio. Under consequentalist thought, this cannot be construed as ethical behavior. A high harm/benefit ratio also results if a terrorist who knows nothing beyond his individual role in the organization is tortured during interrogation. The harm to the detainee is high, and the benefit to society is negligible. This too is unethical by any standard. One way we can avoid the situation I described in the preceding paragraph is to adopt an act utilitarian policy toward interrogative torture. Act utility looks at specific situations, and determines what action would maximize happiness in that situation. Rule utilitarianism sets rule for maximizing happiness that can be applied to a broader scope of situations. Because they are crafting rules for a variety of circumstances, rule utilitarians tend to be more conservative and mindful of individual rights (Casebeer, 2003, p. 4). In our case, a rule utilitarian might make a rule that torture cannot be considered until thirty days of conventional interrogation have passed. This sounds like a fine rule, until you have a terrorist withholding information about a dirty bomb attack that is expected in seven days. To contrast, an act utilitarian would look at individual detainees during normal interrogation. If a determination is made that an act of torture would likely produce useful information in a given subject, then it can be justified. The timing, intensity and type of torture would be adapted to what is expected to work for the individual detainee. Interrogative torture regulated by act utilitarianism would torture the right people, for the right reasons, using the right method. It sounds barbaric, but if we are going to torture a detainee, we better get some results and demonstrate how those results saved lives. Consequentalists would also look at potential problems associated with interrogatory torture. One problem identified by Casebeer (2003) is the possibility that torture could be established as an institution (p. 4). In other words, to make torture effective, intelligence personnel would need to be trained in the proper administration of it. This could lead to research into the most efficient use of torture or textbooks about torture. Would we as a people want to be associated with such things? We can see that this consequence quickly becomes a matter of virtue. Consequentalists would also worry about the image the United States would present to the rest of the world by practicing torture. Would it make us seem less virtuous as a people? This concern is closely related to virtue arguments made against interrogative torture. While I do believe that this can dampen our image in the eyes of the world, we have to ask if our perceived image is worth more than real American lives that can be lost in a terrorist attack. In my opinion, there is nothing more important than protecting Americans from another terror attack. Conclusion One of the tragedies of terrorism is that we as a society now have to make decisions like this. Ultimately, we must balance out the harm torture does, to the good it can present in terms of saving lives from terrorist attacks. Harm not only comes to the terrorist, but also to the society that inflicts torture upon him. Likewise, harm from a terrorist attack is not only from the loss of human life. Everyone in a nation that is struck by terror becomes a victim. By realizing the true extent of the harm that is associated with a terror attack, it becomes more apparent that our government is obligated to prevent another such occurrence. As I reviewed different forms of moral thought in this paper, I identified how interrogative torture could be opposed from each viewpoint. I was able to counter these concerns by adopting a consequentalist stance. By applying consequentalist thought to the problem, it becomes clear that greater harm is risked by not meeting the aforementioned obligation. Understanding that al-Qaeda is not going to make it easy for us requires an act utilitarian policy of using torture in select cases, and only then applying just enough physical coercion to get the results we need. I agree with the virtue theorists that say permitting torture will prevent us from excelling as members of the human race. I think the times that we are living in will only assent to letting us be good enough. Bowden, Mark. (2002). Torture a necessarily evil tool in unlocking terrorist secrets. [Electronic version] Philadelphia Inquirer, N/A. Retrieved October 29, 2007, from Student Edition via Gale: http://find.galegroup.com/itx/start.do?prodId=STOM. Casebeer, William. (2003, January). Torture Interrogation of Terrorists: A Theory of Exceptions (With Notes, Cautions and Warnings). Paper presented at the Joint Services Conference on Professional Ethics. Retrieved October 28, 2007 from usafa.edu/isme/JSCOPE03/Casebeer03.html. Combs, Cindy. (2003). Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Jacoby, Jeff, (2005) Why not torture terrorists? [Electronic version] The Boston Globe. Retrieved October 28th, 2007 from boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/03/20/why_not_torture_terrorists/. Kennedy, Robert. (2003, January). Can Interrogatory Torture be Morally Legitimate? Paper presented at the Joint Services Conference on Professional Ethics. Retrieved October 28, 2007 from usafa.edu/isme/JSCOPE03/Kennedy03.html. Research Papers on Consequentalist Theory Applied to the Practice of Interrogative TorturePETSTEL analysis of IndiaCapital PunishmentGenetic EngineeringTwilight of the UAWIncorporating Risk and Uncertainty Factor in CapitalThe Project Managment Office SystemQuebec and CanadaEffects of Television Violence on ChildrenResearch Process Part OneHip-Hop is Art