History of the 1960 Olympics in Rome, Italy

History of the 1960 Olympics in Rome, Italy The 1960 Olympic Games (also known as the XVII Olympiad) were held in Rome, Italy from August 25 to September 11, 1960. There were many firsts at these Olympics, including the first to be televised, the first to have the Olympic Anthem, and the first to have an Olympic champion run in bare feet.   Fast Facts Official Who Opened the Games:  Italian President Giovanni GronchiPerson Who Lit the Olympic Flame:  Italian track athlete  Giancarlo PerisNumber of Athletes:  5,338  (611 women, 4,727 men)Number of Countries:  83 Number of Events:  150 A Wish Fulfilled After the 1904 Olympics were held in St. Louis, Missouri, the father of the modern Olympic Games, Pierre de Coubertin, wished to have the Olympics hosted in Rome: I desired Rome only because I wanted Olympism, after its return from the excursion to utilitarian America, to don once again the sumptuous toga, woven of art and philosophy, in which I had always wanted to clothe her.* The International Olympic Committee (IOC) agreed and chose Rome, Italy to host the 1908 Olympics. However, when Mt. Vesuvius erupted on April 7, 1906, killing 100 people and burying nearby towns, Rome passed the Olympics to London. It was to take another 54 years until the Olympics would finally be held in Italy. Ancient and Modern Locations Holding the Olympics in Italy did bring together the mixture of ancient and modern that Coubertin had so wanted.  The Basilica of Maxentius and the Baths of Caracalla were restored to host the wrestling and gymnastic events respectively, while an Olympic Stadium and a Sports Palace were built for the Games. First and Last The 1960 Olympic Games were the first Olympics to be fully covered by television. It was also the first time the newly chosen Olympic Anthem, composed by Spiros Samaras, was played. However, the 1960 Olympics were the last that South Africa was allowed to participate in for 32 years. (Once apartheid ended, South Africa was allowed to rejoin the Olympic Games in 1992.) Amazing Stories Abebe Bikila of Ethiopia surprisingly won the gold medal in the marathon - with bare feet. (Video) Bikila was the very first black African to become an Olympic champion. Interestingly, Bikila won the gold again in 1964, but that time, he wore shoes.   United States athlete Cassius Clay, later known as Muhammad Ali, made headlines when he won a gold medal in light heavyweight boxing. He was to go on to an illustrious boxing career, eventually being called, the Greatest.   Born prematurely and then stricken with polio as a young child, U.S. African-American runner Wilma Rudolph overcame here disabilities and went on to win three gold medals at this Olympic Games. A Future King and Queen Participated Greeces Princess Sofia (the future queen of Spain) and her brother, Prince Constantine (the future and last king of Greece), both represented Greece at the 1960 Olympics in sailing. Prince Constantine won a gold medal in sailing, dragon class. A Controversy Unfortunately, there was a ruling problem on the 100-meter freestyle swim. John Devitt (Australia) and Lance Larson (United States) had been neck and neck during the last segment of the race. Though they both finished at about the same time, most of the audience, the sports reporters, and the swimmers themselves believed Larson (U.S.) had won. However, the three judges ruled that Devitt (Australia) had won. Even though the official times showed a faster time for Larson than for Devitt, the ruling held. * Pierre de Coubertin as quoted in Allen Guttmann, The Olympics: A History of the Modern Games (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1992) 28.

Anthony Giddens Theory of Structuration Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Anthony Giddens Theory of Structuration - Essay Example It is through this theory that the field of sociology can connect human behavior and it's influence on the rules of daily living, thinking and our view of the outside world. His introduction of 'third way' between voluntarism and determinism, is important to the notion of what defines strategic choice. Anthony Giddens' contribution to social theory is widely debated. Some argue that his thinking has been too eclectic, eschewing grand theoretical constructs for a collection of ideas with little more than descriptive value. But this thinking is the result of not understanding Giddens' work. Indeed, his career over the years has contributed to sociology as he shifted from interpretations of classical social theory and the debunking of functionalism and positivism to the elaboration of a set of ideas that attempts to bridge the gap between agency and structure. Giddens' explains: "Structure enters into the explanation of action in a dual way: as the medium of its production and at the same time as its outcome in the reproduction of social forms. Thus the study of social reproduction cannot be conceived as the aggregation of numerous 'productive acts', which tends to be the conclusion that voluntaristic forms of social theory lead to; nor, on the other hand, can the production of action, as a rationalized accomplishment, be treated as merely 'structurally determined'" (Giddens 1977) Giddens' theory, instead of looking for reasons to excuse or belie agency mistake, actually promotes respect for competent human agency. His work is indeed prominent for methodology and is multi-level, recognising the embeddedness of human actors in wider society, all of which speaks to the very foundations of sociology. Moreover, he offers extensive and impressive coverage of theory to self-reflexivity, modernity and politics, placing them all within the illuminating framework of a historical context thus adding a new layer to the world of sociology. Giddens' writing has always embodied a political and ethical position, one that has changed considerably over the years and is best understood through the social context in which it was written. Giddens' work in the 1970s attempted to marry liberalism and socialism, but, following the collapse of Communism in the 1990 East-European revolutions, his worldview became liberal rather than socialist, and his later work on reflexivity and t he 'Third Way' embodies this. Much like the human condition embraced and ever changing in a sociological context, Gidden's works contribute by allowing us to note change, appreciate it and most importantly, adjust to it. Others, however, point to his very work of structuration as a major theoretical contribution to sociological thinking. In his book New Rules of Sociological Method (1976), Giddens argued that agency produces structure and that structure is constituted of rules and resources by which that self-same agency is recreated. That is to say, Giddens wrote that the epistemology of sociological research was a "double hermeneutic" in which theory offered an explanation for the phenomena of everyday life and everyday life provided a means by which theory could be understood. In other words, the two acted in a dialectical relationship to each other. Early on in his

How the Role of the Organizational Trainer Has Changed in the Last Ten Essay

How the Role of the Organizational Trainer Has Changed in the Last Ten Years - Essay Example hanging working practices and a highly competitive business environment has called upon most organizations to hire employees who can handle these (Stwart, et al, 2005, p. 357; Hodson and Sullivan, 2007, p. 221; Holman, 2005, p. 1; Verburg, 2005, p. 50). Some skills, structure of knowledge, and working practices have been termed as irrelevant. Due to the significance that change comes with, there is therefore a great need for organizational trainers to live up to the challenge of helping people to not only unlearn some of the redundant skills, but also to acquire and relearn new ones. This is part of what has made the role of the Human resource Development to change from training to development. Therefore, the role of an organizational trainer (Human Resource Development) has changed in a number of ways. First, there is a rising interest being developed among organizational trainers in labor aspects such as long-term unemployment, inadequate skills, and equivalent opportunities. Secon dly, they are faced with the task of raising awareness on the significance of training, and continue with spreading the concept that, in the long run, it is the development of the labor skills and the learning culture that an economy’s long-term competitive performance and its enterprises are based on. Thirdly, the trainer is preoccupied with the role of coming up with nation-wide training techniques that should be determined by people, investors and national competencies. Fourth, there is the establishment of corporate mechanisms that should be determined by core activities leading to the development of non-core services such as instruction and consultancy. Fifth, the trainer should take part in organizational restructuring that include decentralization, empowering senior operating... Apart from accepting their position in organizations, trainers had a strong belief in the value of their training and were eager to invest in it. A trainee’s evolving career depended on the trainer’s finite range of knowledge and skills backed by wide experience. The provision of this early training set a pace for long-term professionalism such that, once people were trained, they were expected to exercise the contents of the training throughout their career lifetime. There was no room for more investment in training. These conventional views have been overtaken by time due to the change that has come with the twenty-first century. This change has not only made most organizations to cope with it, but has also caused individuals to affirm the fact that with time, their training becomes obsolete. New technology, changing working practices and a highly competitive business environment has called upon most organizations to hire employees who can handle these (Stwart, et al, 2005, p. 357; Hodson and Sullivan, 2007, p. 221; Holman, 2005, p. 1; Verburg, 2005, p. 50). Some skills, structure of knowledge, and working practices have been termed as irrelevant. Due to the significance that change comes with, there is, therefore, a great need for organizational trainers to live up to the challenge of helping people to not only unlearn some of the redundant skills, but also to acquire and relearn new ones. This is part of what has made the role of the Human Resource Development to change from training to development.

Arab Woman and Politics on Present Times Term Paper

Arab Woman and Politics on Present Times - Term Paper Example Through looking at the position of the Arab women at a global scale, of their movements, empowerments and developments in their struggle for gender inequality and at their political participation in their society, this paper found out that Arab women were already making changes of involvement in politics. However, there were still constraints in achieving this entirely. Introduction Women, indeed, were always seen as a status lower than men. Discrimination of different sorts had been experienced by these women in every part of the world for the reason that gender was seen as a factor that would influence women’s position at a disadvantaged position. There were a lot of forms of inequality that had been experienced by these women simply because of the fact that they were born to be women. Meanwhile, the case of the Arab women was not an exception to this gender inequality. In fact, throughout the history and in every part of the world, Arab women had experienced much more varie d forms of discrimination than other women. These women had suffered the restrictions of their freedoms and rights. According to Karam (1999), among the reasons of these women being subjected to restriction of their freedoms and rights, to having a low political representation and other forms of inequality was their religion of being an Islam. However, it was not the case that it was only their religion that had added up to making these women be discriminated but their culture in the Arab world also had influenced the inequality. These were main causes that had served as impediments in achieving equality were reflected in their laws on economy, education, criminal justice, health care, political representation and others. Based on the intersectionality theory (Collins, 2000), the Arab women had been undergoing through multiple forms of discrimination because axes of their identity like gender, culture and religion had been interacting at various levels that contribute to their exper ience of social inequality. Given this, the focus of my study would delve on the experiences and situations of Arab women in their struggle to be represented in the political arena in the contemporary Arab world. This research was of important concern for the very reason that these women had continued to experience intense forms of discrimination in other regions of the world and most especially, in their own nations. In order to gain much understanding of the topic under study, the research paper was divided into following sections: a) Situating the Picture Globally, b) Movements, Empowerments and Developments of Women for Gender Equality in the Arab World, and c) The Political Participation of Arab Women and Its Challenges. This section would first present an overview of the literatures which had aimed at providing a cursory outlook at how to look at this concern. The last part of this paper was the generalization on Arab women and politics on the present times. a) Situating the P icture Globally Women had received a special attention on their concerns regarding the continuity of discrimination against them and their marginalized roles worldwide. The Arab women were not isolated from the debate on discrimination and inequality. In fact, it was the case that according to the Arab

Stigma of Self-Harm in Healthcare Services

Stigma of Self-Harm in Healthcare Services Self-harm a deliberate attempt to self-poison or self-injure regardless of the incentive or suicidal intent is a growing problem in the United Kingdom with a heavy burden on health-care systems. Despite this escalating crisis, attitudes from health professionals who treat self-harmers remain negative and the quality of care is deteriorating. The myths of why people self-harm play a substantial role in health professionals perceptions of self-harmers, which impacts on the efficacy of intervention and recovery rates; however, these myths are far from the reality. This article will reveal the stigma that self-harmers encounter from those at the front-line of our healthcare services and will seek to explain the real reasons behind self-harmful behaviour. By increasing public awareness and educating health professionals on the motives behind self-harmful behaviour, misconceptions and negative attitudes can be diminished. Studies show that self-harm is a common pattern among adolescents and young adults 13-25% has reported a history of self-injury. Although many young people only engage in self-harm once or twice, others go on to become chronic self-harmers, with studies evidencing that 6% of the college population do chronically self-harm. Still, these figures may be underestimated as many self-harmers do not seek help. Due to the lack of knowledge and negative misconceptions, those who do seek help report unsatisfactory care from paramedics and emergency staff, who are often the first point of contact. Front-line professionals are in a rare position to interrupt the cycle of self-harm; however, with inadequate rapport between staff and patients, the cycle will continue to have devastating consequences on individuals in need of help. The following misconceptions are put forward. The first misconception of why people self-harm is the desire to end ones life. In a systematic review of attitudes towards people who self harm, it was found that suicide-risk was a common reason for self-injury as agreed among most clinical staff groups (Saunders, Hawton, Fortune Farrell, 2012). Whilst self-harm is the biggest predictor of suicidality, those who self-injure do so as a means to manage their distress and cope with negative feelings. The affect regulation model of self-injury proposes that it is a method to relieve acute negative feelings and emotions. It is suggested that early environment may play a role in affect regulation by teaching poor coping strategies to deal with emotional distress. It is also suggested that those with a biological disposition for emotional instability may be more prone to resort to this strategy to manage their emotions. In a systematic review of self-harm (Edmondson, Brennan House, 2015), affect-regulation was found to be the most commo n reason for the behaviour. Quantitative studies revealed that the majority of participants (93%) favoured affect-regulation items such as to get relief from a terrible state of mind or calming myself down. This was further supported by qualitative studies which reported that the majority of participants (92%) endorsed in reasons such as relieving emotional pain or to calm myself when Im incredibly emotional or upset. In further support of the affect-regulation model, research has reported that self-harmers have a poor ability to regulate emotions when experiencing negative affect, as indicated by MRI scans revealing greater amygdala activation (Davis et al., 2014). Consequently, this research shows that self-harm is often carried out for the purpose of reducing negative emotions and to avoid attempting suicide, as opposed to the misconception of health professionals. The second misconception of why people self-harm is attention-seeking and manipulation. A study which examined nurses perceptions of self-harmers revealed that labels were used to describe patients such as attention seekers or time wasters (Shaw Sandy, 2016). Although some self-harmers agree that self-injury is an attention-seeking act, most insist that it is a help-seeking strategy. The interpersonal-influence model argues that self-harm is undertaken as a means of influencing people in the self-harmers environment. It is argued that self-harm is a cry for help, an avoidance of abandonment or an effort to ensure that they are listened to. To support this, research has found that the second most commonly reported reason for deliberate self-harm is a cry for help motive, including reasons such as to show how desperate I was feeling or to hope that others notice something is wrong (Muehlenkamp, Brausch, Quigley Whitlock, 2012). In a systematic review (Edmondson et al., 2015), interpe rsonal influence was a common reason for self-harm. Quantitative studies revealed that a large majority of participants (87%) favoured interpersonal influence items such as to seek help from someone or letting others know the extent of my physical pain. This was further supported by qualitative studies which reported that over half of the participants (56%) supported interpersonal reasons such as I received the warmth, love and attention I had been looking for. Reasons such as to frighten someone or to shock or hurt someone are least commonly endorsed. This research supports the view that self-harm is a call for help, unlike the misconception which suggests that self-harm is an act of manipulation. A third misconception is that self-harmers can stop if they want to. Although this is true for some, studies have shown that self-harm can become an addiction. In substance addiction, there is a positive reinforcement which is associated with increasing dopamine levels in the brain and negative reinforcement which is associated with relieving negative mood states. Research has found that negative reinforcement plays a part in self-injury. Participants generally experience negative feelings before self-harming, including sadness and frustration but subsequently experience positive feelings after the act, including euphoria and satisfaction (Klonsky, 2009). In a qualitative study, participants compared their self-harm to having a drug addiction (Brown Kimball, 2012). They declared that self-injury was a reliable fix for overwhelming feelings and they had experienced highs from their self-harming behaviour. Participants also stated that their need to self-harm progressed over time, inc luding the frequency and intensity, and when trying to stop the behaviour they would feel a greater urge to continue. Furthermore, biological research has found that self-harmful behaviour releases endorphins in the brain which produces a euphoric state, reducing pain and alleviating emotional distress (Sher Stanley, 2009). Therefore, self-harmful behaviour can be overpowering and can be a challenge to cease, unlike the misconception that one can easily stop if they want to. Although the code of professional conduct states that health professionals should be kind, respectful, compassionate, non-judgemental and show an appreciation of diversity and equality, it appears that many hospital staff are not following this important regime. Whilst these misconceptions are circulating healthcare systems, perceptions and attitudes toward self-harmers remain unchanged. Discrimination towards those vulnerable can be direct and indirect. Research has revealed that some staff deliberately distant themselves from self-harming patients because they hold feelings of irritation, anger and frustration towards them, especially those who frequently return to hospital (Conlon Tuathail, 2012). Some health professionals may not be aware of their attitude; however, their demeanour and manner towards patients can appear obvious to the recipient. As a result, self-harming patients become less of a priority compared to those with a physical illness; consequently, influencing their entitlement to care. Correspondingly, many self-harming patients feel ignored by health professionals and believe that they are perceived as harder work or time consumers (Chapman Martin, 2014). Research has found that young people who self-harm have reported avoiding the access and emergency department due to their own and others previous unsatisfactory experiences. It has been reported that patients have experienced discrimination and have been denied care, such as pain relief, because they have caused their own injuries. Patients were also denied information and were talked about in an ignorant manner. They were also told by health professionals that they were selfish, inconsiderate and were wasting time that could be spent on real patients. Consequently, negative attitudes reinforced the feelings of shame and worthlessness leading to further self-harmful behaviour. This influenced their future decisions to avoid help from health professionals (Owens, Hansford, Sharkey Ford, 2016). Although some health professionals can be stigmatizing towards self-harming patients, other professionals such as nurses feel helpless, powerless and dissatisfied when caring for these patients due to lack of knowledge and training. Nurses feel frustrated as the emergency department is not helpful in treating patients who self-harm the busy nature of the environment, lack of time, privacy and resources all of which prevent the development of therapeutic relationships (Martin Chapman, 2014). Nurses feel that treatments and interventions are insufficient and self-harm patients require specialist treatment which the emergency department cannot provide (Gibb et al., 2010). Research has found a negative relationship between staff members negative attitudes and knowledge: health professionals who have an accurate knowledge of self-harmful behaviour show a more positive attitude overall and feel more effective at treating patients. Moreover, when nurses are keen to empathise with self-ha rming patients, the rapport between the nurse and patient is generally more positive (Tzeng, Yang, Tzeng Chen, 2010). Research has shown that when nurses are provided with mental health training, their attitude changes towards those who self-harm. For example, nurses become more empathetic and patient-orientated. Nurses also described having more confidence to communicate effectively with patients. This positively influenced feedback from patients and the team atmosphere (Karman, Kool, Gamel Meijel, 2015). Key findings: There are three main misconceptions surrounding the motives and intentions of self-harm self-harmers are suicidal, attention seeking and/or manipulative, and they have the ability to stop self-harming when they want to. Psychological theories (the affect-regulation model, the interpersonal-influence model) and research challenge these misconceptions and claim that people self-injure in order to manage their emotions or to seek help from those around them, and their ability to stop can be hindered by the addictive nature. Health professionals direct and indirect behaviour can influence the care that a self-harming patient receives, potentially increasing the risk of further self-harm. Health professionals report feeling powerless when caring for self-harming patients due to the nature of the environment, lack of resources, skills and knowledge. Self-harming patients are receiving unsatisfactory care which suggests that there is a lack of knowledge and procedure for managing these patients. The national guidelines are designed to influence local and departmental policies to lead front-line staff; however, this system appears to be failing, as the procedure to care for those who self-harm remains ineffective (Rees, Rapport, Thomas, John Snooks, 2014). Health professions working in the National Health Service are already under strenuous pressure, working long hours and coping with increasing workloads and organisational changes due to the lack of resources and funding. At present, this is an on-going struggle for staff, so with the accumulation of further education and training, this may be seem like an impossible challenge. Nevertheless, patients are priority in the code of professional conduct and it is an ethical issue if health professionals continue to ignore this code. In any case, there is a strong link between self-harm and suicide, despite many self-harmers agreeing that suicidality is not a motive. Therefore, these patients should be taken seriously and health professionals should be made aware of the risk of suicide, especially those who are inexperienced. Consequently, there are many suggestions that can be made in order to reduce stigma and improve healthcare for those who self-injure. First, health professionals should be educated on the motives behind self-harmful behaviour and the context in which it occurs. Education may not work alone; therefore, it may be beneficial if a trainer with personal experiences of self-harm shares their story in order to inform professionals through a traditional-transference approach (Karman, Kool, Gamel Meijel, 2015). This will provide professionals with a deeper understanding and will help to change perceptions of those who self-harm. They should also be educated on communication and interpersonal skills, which will help to enhance therapeutic relationships between staff members and patients. In addition to education, on-going training for health professionals should be provided to continuously update their knowledge and skills to care for those with self-injuries. Training should cover knowledge, understanding, attitudes, behaviours, risk assessment and management of self-harming patients. Staff should also be trained to identify risky behaviours and to understand the barriers that self-harmers encounter, as well as understanding their mental health needs and helping them to seek advice and guidance. In addition, refection in practice should be encouraged when caring for people who self-harm. In short, policy documents, care pathways, protocols and local guidelines should be reviewed and revised so that education and training needs of health professionals are met. This will potentially influence the care that self-harmers receive. Health professionals should treat self-harming patients as any other sick patients on the ward and communicate sensitively. They should aim to develop rapport with patient in order to improve patients engagement with the services. Nevertheless, health professionals who work on wards where self-harm is severe may also require extra support from colleagues and managers or may require psychological support such as debriefing. If the pressure is too intense for health professionals, a brief screening tool could be introduce to help identify those at risk of suicide. Alternatively, there could be a specialised clinician working on emergency departments supervising front-line staff. Thus, a multi-disciplinary framework may be the ultimate approach to success which will also relieve some pressure off front-line staff. The context which care is provided to patients and the lack of training and support from managers can challenge professionals ability to do their job which affects their confidence and increases feelings of frustration and negativity.

Analysis of Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illu

Analysis of Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations Michael Walzer first wrote Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations in the years following the Vietnam War, and unfortunately its premise on morality in war will always remain as relevant as it was then as it is now, with conflict between states forever existing. Michael Walzer is one of the most prominent social critics in North America and in this book, he explores two main concepts, the justice of war and the justice in war in a great depth, and uses numerous historical references to support his claims. It is a very well configured piece, written in such a way of persuasion that your personal view on morality in war may ultimately change after delving into thoughts for several hundred pages. To an overwhelming majority of people, the words ‘war’ and ‘morality’ have seemingly opposing meanings, however in the preface to his book, Walzer points out that "whether or not its specific terminology is adapted, just-war theory has always played a part in official argument about war" (Walzer XI). He proceeds to discuss in a greater detail the ways that war has been perceived and how this impacts the topics of war and morality, and in doing so, he provides an intelligently structured and persuasive argument that can be viewed within a moral context. He addresses this topic both from the view of the role of the state and also from the perspective of how the decision to fight impacts the individual. Walzer takes the position that an individual should fight only for private and personal reasons rather then from nationalistic feelings because he feels that it is crucial that this decision should be freely chosen and that it constitutes one of the crucial requirements for a ‘just’ war. Walzer defines a ‘just war’ as a ‘limited war,’ and that just wars are governed by a set of rules, designed to prevent, as much as possible, "the use of violence and coercion against non-combatant populations" (Walzer XVII); On the other hand, a limited war attempts to establish the way things were prior to the aggression taking place. Aside from extreme cases, just wars do not have legitimate reasons for reaching beyond this goal, including the replacing of the aggressor’s... ...f becoming aggressors themselves. As Walzer points out, the Kuwait regime that US intervention restored to power was little better for the Kuwait people than their Iraqi invaders. However, the ultimate fate of this regime was placed back in the hands of the Kuwaiti people disregarding our attempt at improvement. Reading this book was both uplifting, in that Walzer does an excellent job of developing a framework to understanding what should and should not be done during wartime, as well as depressing, in realizing that war will only evolve and forever exist. The limits that a ‘just’ war places on the use of aggression between states for both states and individuals, according to Walzer, offers a rational and moral way of perceiving modern warfare. He ends his text with the comment that "The restraint of war is the beginning of peace" essentially summing up his argument, though will this ‘end’ ever arrive? (Walzer 335). This book offers a sane way of perceiving morality within the insanity of war. Work Cited Walzer, Michael. Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations. New York: Basic Books, 1977. Analysis of Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illu Analysis of Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations Michael Walzer first wrote Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations in the years following the Vietnam War, and unfortunately its premise on morality in war will always remain as relevant as it was then as it is now, with conflict between states forever existing. Michael Walzer is one of the most prominent social critics in North America and in this book, he explores two main concepts, the justice of war and the justice in war in a great depth, and uses numerous historical references to support his claims. It is a very well configured piece, written in such a way of persuasion that your personal view on morality in war may ultimately change after delving into thoughts for several hundred pages. To an overwhelming majority of people, the words ‘war’ and ‘morality’ have seemingly opposing meanings, however in the preface to his book, Walzer points out that "whether or not its specific terminology is adapted, just-war theory has always played a part in official argument about war" (Walzer XI). He proceeds to discuss in a greater detail the ways that war has been perceived and how this impacts the topics of war and morality, and in doing so, he provides an intelligently structured and persuasive argument that can be viewed within a moral context. He addresses this topic both from the view of the role of the state and also from the perspective of how the decision to fight impacts the individual. Walzer takes the position that an individual should fight only for private and personal reasons rather then from nationalistic feelings because he feels that it is crucial that this decision should be freely chosen and that it constitutes one of the crucial requirements for a ‘just’ war. Walzer defines a ‘just war’ as a ‘limited war,’ and that just wars are governed by a set of rules, designed to prevent, as much as possible, "the use of violence and coercion against non-combatant populations" (Walzer XVII); On the other hand, a limited war attempts to establish the way things were prior to the aggression taking place. Aside from extreme cases, just wars do not have legitimate reasons for reaching beyond this goal, including the replacing of the aggressor’s... ...f becoming aggressors themselves. As Walzer points out, the Kuwait regime that US intervention restored to power was little better for the Kuwait people than their Iraqi invaders. However, the ultimate fate of this regime was placed back in the hands of the Kuwaiti people disregarding our attempt at improvement. Reading this book was both uplifting, in that Walzer does an excellent job of developing a framework to understanding what should and should not be done during wartime, as well as depressing, in realizing that war will only evolve and forever exist. The limits that a ‘just’ war places on the use of aggression between states for both states and individuals, according to Walzer, offers a rational and moral way of perceiving modern warfare. He ends his text with the comment that "The restraint of war is the beginning of peace" essentially summing up his argument, though will this ‘end’ ever arrive? (Walzer 335). This book offers a sane way of perceiving morality within the insanity of war. Work Cited Walzer, Michael. Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations. New York: Basic Books, 1977.

Chris McCandless

McCandless wanted to live an independent and self-reliant life. As a child, he grew up in a materialistic and dysfunctional family. Although he had a close relationship with his sister, Carine, Chris preferred isolating himself. It was unimaginably difficult for Chris to have a relationship with his father after he had found out about his father's second family. Chris's mother, Billie, didn't have much of a relationship with him either.For Chris, being alone was normal and part of his very day routine. As he got older he wanted more and more to live on his own and be in the wild. Chris and his family would go to the mountains every year to visit which gave Chris this love for nature. He wanted to live in his own Utopia, in the wild. McCandless wasn't careless or delusional. He was determined, and focused on his task at hand; to, in his own words, â€Å"no longer be poisoned by civilization, and walk alone to become lost in the wild. He met many people through-out his travels owards Alaska, but didn't stay too long to become attached to them. On April 28, 1992, James Gallien gave Christopher McCandless a ride to the Stampede Trail in Alaska where Christopher set out to begin in Journey into the wild. This was the last date that anyone ever saw Christopher McCandless alive. Walking into Denali National Park with a . 22 caliber rifle and a 10 pound bag of rice isn't necessarily ridiculous, but expecting to survive an entire summer off nothing but the land and wild game certainly is.Chris read many books by his favorite, Jack London being one. Jack wrote a book about the wild and the dangers of being in it, which is where Chris got some inspiration from. Chris carved the phrase â€Å"Jack London is king† in a tree stump near his campsite.. Chris writing that phrase shows that his quest went farther than finding himself. Chris wanted a connection with nature. He did what he was striving for and although his ending was tragic, he still did it by himself and w ithout anyone or anything. Chris McCandless Mishandles was not crazy, he wasn't stupid, and he defiantly was not looking for a way to die. Although some may think of them as selfish, he had his reasons for packing up his few belongings, leaving his family and walking â€Å"Into the Wild. † The death of Chris Mishandles was an accidental tragedy. Chris and his dad never really got along (Source One. ) They were both stubborn making it impossible to agree on anything. They both always had to be right. Chris decided to be â€Å"the bigger person† though and stick to his mother and fathers plan for IM through college.He TLD complain and he even visited them occasionally throughout his college career. He loved his family, but he couldn't handle being around them anymore. He had kept all his anger and frustration built up inside of him and his only option was to leave. He never intended to hurt his family. He just needed some time away. Chris needed some time to cool off and forget about his family troubles. Once he fo und out about his father's marriage problems, forgetting about his family problems seemed impossible.In Chrism's mind getting as far away room his dad and his family as possible was the best option. The only option. So that's what he did. He didn't mean to hurt his family or himself In any way. Some believe that Chrism's family problems had gotten the best of him and that he was ready to put an end to his life. It is ignorant to think that because he went into the Alaskan wilderness completely prepared for the amount of time that he planned on staying there. Even though Source One never mentions Chris having a map, Source two says â€Å"Counter to the portrayal in the Krause book and Penn film, ChrisMishandles carried ‘Into the wild' a wallet with multiple sources of Identification and $300 In cash. As well as a map. † If Chris had Intended to die while he was out there he wouldn't have taken the money, the ID, and especially not the map. Source One says that Chris went to the local Alaska university library to research edible plants and berried that he could gather and eat. If he didn't plan on surviving then he wouldn't have been worried about eating. He took a gun and bullets with him too. He was well equipped to get food and seemed like he planned on surviving.In Chrism's Journal entries In August he wrote that hothouse he had accomplished his goal to live In the Alaskan wilderness and thought It was time to go home. He walked all the way back to the river and couldn't cross because it was too wild. He wasn't all too concerned because he had enough knowledge and supplies to survived for a while longer. If Chris had really wanted to die in Alaska he wouldn't have waited until August to do so. For living on the streets with no permanent home for so long, Mishandles was very good with people.He met lots of them before he went to Alaska and even met a ewe while he was there. Wayne Westerners, Jan Burros, Ron Franz were a few of the people he met d uring his travels (Source One. ) He was very easy to get along with and worked hard for them. They all loved him. He didn't seem like he had a problem with getting too attached to people because he always planes on coming back. He wrote to them and kept them updated and promised to come visit. He was very good forever. The Alaskan wilderness was a very dangerous place to Just wonder into as Chris did and he found that out.He caused his family terrible worry and sorrow and would have been more observant and cautious when crossing the river. Realizing that it wouldn't be as calm in August as it was when he crossed it. He made some mistakes, but then again, don't we all? Christopher Mishandles followed his dreams and not everybody gets the chance to do that. Source one says â€Å"The peculiar thing is that he went out and did the things he dreamed about, not simply for a two-weeks' vacation in the civilized and trimmed wonderlands, but for months and months in the midst of wonder.. â €  And that's exactly what Mishandles did.Yes he died, and it as dangerous, but he died successful. He followed all his dreams and accomplished all his goals before he died, which is not something everyone can claim to have done. Chris Mishandles was an independent, stubborn individual who knew what he wanted and wasn't afraid to go get it. He made a few mistakes here and there (such as crossing the river and not knowing how to clean and cook the moose) but everybody makes mistakes. His Just happened to cost him his life. He didn't go â€Å"into the wild† hoping for death. He went searching for independence and that's exactly what he found. Chris McCandless To me Chris McCandless was a dedicated and adventurous young man. He was very dedicated to the thing he loved. When people told him what to do he very rarely listened to them, so to me he was very independent. When he was put to a job he was very dedicated to it, it didn’t matter what it was. Like when he moved to the town where Wayne Westerberg live he was put to work and all the people he worked with agreed that he was a very hard working person.When Chris decided to go into the wilderness to live, he wanted to start a new life; he wants to find out who he is. Then again what his sister Carine said also seem very true about Chris, â€Å"Chris knew exactly who he was. He was searching for a place in this world that he fit into, where he could be true to himself.† He didn’t just want to think about the meaning of life, he actually wanted to live it for himself. He when traveling to find true happiness and beauty. That is the reason he did all what he did. I think Christopher McCandless went â€Å"Into the Wild† to discover what is summed up in his quote â€Å"happiness is only real when shared†, something I think he found out far too late. He went all that way to discover that something is only really worth experiencing if you can share it with someone else.Before Chris died I do think he found what he was looking for. I think that he felt that there was truth out in the wild that there wasn’t in his life at home. I think that he would have stay as long as he did if he didn’t find what he was looking for. I think that he finally found a place where he belonged and place where he finally fit in. I totally agree with what Jon Krakauer statement when he says that Chris wasn’t a nutcase, sociopath, or an outcast. I think he was a very upbeat and inspirational person.I love how he was and how he thought. I think it was very unique of him to think that live on his own in Alaska would help him find out who he was . I can compare myself to Chris in many ways like when he likes to be alone to think and when he can read his favorite authors books over and over again. With a wealthy and successful family he ditch virtually everything for a new life, it think that was very brave of him. He never had anything planed he just went with it. He never knows what life had waiting for him out there but I’m pretty sure he could wait to find out. I don’t think he was scared in  anyway, I feel like he was more curious and excited then scared.Chris made a decision and many others on his two year journey to Alaska. He made these decisions with certain traits that he possesses, whether they were strengths that helped him or weaknesses that lead to his unfortunate death by starvation but I felt that they all made him out to be who he was. If only he would have brought more things with him on his journey, he could have been destine for many great things.