What Money Cant Buy The Moral Limits of Markets essay

What Money Cant Buy The Moral Limits of Markets essay What Money Cant Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets essay What Money Cant Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets essayThe development of the contemporary society tends to the increasing impact of consumerism on social relations, culture and values of people. In such a situation, the development of the contemporary society leads to the devaluation of basic moral values and to dehumanization of interpersonal relations, when consumerist and commercial relations become determinant in social relations. In this regard, it is possible to refer to the book What Money Cant Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets by Michael J. Sandel, where the author explores the development of the contemporary society and increasing impact of commercial relations in all spheres of social life. The author raises an important problem of the moral development and ethics of the society, where everything is for sale. Michael J. Sandel questions how far people can go in their strife for selling and buy everything. He raises a bunch of ethical dilemmas with no definite answer to respo nd. In such a way, he attempts to question basic ethical issues, which people tend to ignore in their everyday life or take them for granted.In fact, What Money Cant Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets focuses on the rise of the contemporary society where moral values influence consistently social relations are vulnerable to consistent changes due to the shift of moral values and norms. Sandel insists that commercialization has become the mainstream trend in the development of the contemporary society. In this regard, it is hardly possible to disagree with the author since the contemporary society has started to shift to the overwhelming commercialization since the time of the industrial revolution, while by the end of the 20th century the commercialization of the contemporary culture and society has reached unparalleled level. The contemporary society may be viewed as a sheer consumerist society, where everything is for sale, as Sandel states. At the same time, the book does not just show off that everything is on sale. Instead the author uses the personal appeal to readers asking them what else money cannot buy today and what people are not ready to sell so far. In such a way, the author encourages the audience to start thinking of really important issues and the role of money in their life. Sandel does not attempt to impose his opinion on the audience. Instead, he helps the audience to come to the point, when the uselessness of the contemporary consumerist culture and commercialization of social relations become obvious.Sandel is definitely right, when he uncovers vices of the contemporary consumerist culture. People turn into mere consumers making the cult of consumption and consumerism becomes the only purpose of their life. the excessive consumption leads to the destructive impact on the society. However, Sandel focuses his attention on moral issues only. At the same time, the author pays little, if any attention to the impact of the overwhelming commercial ization of the society on the environment. However, the negative impact of consumerism and commercialization of the contemporary society on the natural environment is obvious. Human activities oriented on consumption and commerce lead to the destruction of their natural environment, extinction of many species, decrease of biodiversity, global climate change. All these changes are irrevocable and have a destructive impact not only on human life but also on the life on the entire planet. However, Sandel does not take these issues into account that apparently weakens his argument because the appeal to moral issues only may be insufficient for people who are accustomed to live in the consumerist society. The revelation of the destructive impact of commercialization and consumerism on the natural environment would reveal that people face the real threat of the extinction just like other species inhabiting the planet and this argument could be stronger, if the author attempts to persuade the audience that people should change their values and shift from commerce and sales to spirituality and morality.In such a situation, the high risk of the devaluation of basic ethical and moral norms arises because consumerism and commerce interferes in all spheres of human life. Even such would-be sacred concepts as family have become subjects to commerce and sale. For instance, today the divorce rate is exorbitantly high, while many divorces, if not all, involve financial issues to the extent that   everything and everyone, including children, become subjects to trade during the divorce process to the extent that one parents have to give in some financial benefits to have larger opportunities to communicate with children.In this regard, Sandel’s argument that commerce and the desire to trade everything has penetrated deeply into the consciousness of people seems to be absolutely reasonable and right. The author shows that such commercialization leads to the loss of mora lity and devaluation of basic ethical norms and rules.At the same time, the author warns against such commercialization of the contemporary society revealing possible negative effects of the rise of the immoral society or the society where the commerce is the milestone of moral values and norms and the determinant factor influencing interpersonal and social relations. In fact, Sandel’s argument eventually leads readers to the conclusion that the excessive commercialization has already led to the loss of spirituality, while consumerism and materialism dominate over the contemporary culture.Being aware of disastrous effects of the further commercialization of the society, where everything is on sale, Sandle attempts to build up the strategy of resistance to such a trend in the development of the contemporary culture and society. In this regard, the main argument of Sandel in defense of non-commercially, spiritually-grounded view is the deep-rooted belief in universal, humanisti c values. The author apparently wants to say that there are issues which cannot stand commercial relations.Moreover, Sandel argues that people often provoke commercialization of their interpersonal relations and bring in commerce in their relations, when the commerce is absolutely unnecessary. For instance, it is possible to refer to the case of parents paying their children for good grades instead of communicating with them and explaining them what they are actually learning for. In such a situation, the expectation of the financial reward becomes the major driver for children, whereas learning itself is not the goal but the tool to get some extra money or some material reward from their parents.However, even though Sandel apparently rejects the commercialization of the contemporary culture and social relations but still he fails to provide clear and strong argument and recommendations on how people can change their life. Instead of answering the question what people should do to c hange their world for better and return to spirituality and moral values instead of the irresistible strife for sale and commercial relations, he just appeals to the public to start the debate over issues he raises in his book. In other words, he just wants people to start thinking of the role of money and its impact on social relations, moral values and norms of the contemporary society.Nevertheless, the book What Money Cant Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets written by Sandel is still very important in regard to the possible change of the contemporary culture and return to moral values and norms. In such a way, the author attempts to raise the public debate over the development of the contemporary society which is essential in the time when consumerism has become the determinant trend in the development of the contemporary society. Today, people are unaware of the importance of basic humanistic values and, more important, they fail to understand the vanity of the pursuit of wealth a nd commodities in terms of the contemporary consumerist culture.Thus, Sandel’s What Money Cant Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets reveal the mainstream trend of the contemporary society oriented on the consumption. The trend to commercialization of interpersonal relations lead to dehumanization and the author attempts to make the audience aware of the negative impact of commercialization on human life and social relations. However, the author does not offer the clear way out. Instead, he just suggests starting the public debate over the problem of commercialization and consumerism of the contemporary society.

An Outline for Business School Essays

An Outline for Business School Essays In the previous page we discussed the importance of creating a personalized writing schedule for your school essay. Now that you have (hopefully) completed that task, I would like to introduce the next step in the application essay process: producing an outline. Producing a quality outline is crucial in writing a noteworthy composition. In my opinion, the more defined the outline, the better the essay. Regardless of what type of school essay you are planning to write, it always helps to first develop an outline. For the sake of argument, lets say that you are writing a business school essay. Business school essays are no different from any other types of essays in terms of the creative process. Like any composition, you must first create an outline. An outline is simply a condensed treatment of a particular subject. In this case, the subject is business school essays. Therefore, the formula for your business school essay might include a section on the personal events in your life which led you to direct your studies towards a degree in business administration. Whatever the topic, make sure that your outline includes specific instructions on what youd like to include in your composition. Create your school essay as you would a road map. Be precise, be defined, and above all be logical. From business school essays to undergraduate admissions compositions, one thing is for certain: the better the outline the better the paper. I recommend that you take a few days to create your outline. Once you feel confident with your treatment, you can advance to the next step. In the meanwhile, if you have any questions about MBA essays or if you would like to see samples of quality admissions essays, I suggest that you access the adjacent link.

As a leader in the 21st Century, I want to know what technology Research Paper

As a leader in the 21st Century, I want to know what technology decisions to make - Research Paper Example Because of the massive reach of social media, firms regard it as an effective tool for driving relevant messages. From an internal communications point of view, social media allows employees to efficiently manage the exchanging of both professional and personal messages. Through social media, corporate culture has been further enhanced. From an external communications perspective, social media is used by firms to directly interact with their target customers in a less costly manner through the personalization of advertising messages. Therefore, in comparison to traditional forms of media, such as television and radio, marketing professionals prefer social media due to its wide audience reach and flexible nature. In this paper, we examine the relevance of leadership techniques in driving the effectiveness of social media, both internally and externally. As such, the discussion is divided into three parts: (1) look closely into social media as a business tool; (2) delve into the forms of leadership techniques, and (3) analyze the connection between proper leadership techniques and results-driven utilization of social media. In the end, this paper aims to justify its thesis that the effective use of social media in business depends on the leadership styles of leaders in a company. Research: Social Media and its Emerging Relevance in Business Overview of Social Media Social Media is defined by Wright State University (n.d.) as â€Å"an interactive, specifically online, community that builds and enhances relationships between individuals and groups based on interest, occupation, and demographic measures while delivering viable information to such individuals and groups.† Human communication, in this sense, is made more efficient through social media. The increasing use of social media by businesses has been underscored in numerous studies. D’Angelo (2010), in his academic paper entitled â€Å"Social Media Community Management: Implications for Busines s Communication Curriculum,† highlighted that 91% of the top 500 companies the U.S. used at least one social media tool in 2009, an uplift from 77% in 2008. There was also an increase in social media use by small businesses from 12% to 24% between December 2008 and December 2009 (D’Angelo, 2010). Moreover, Harvard Business Review Analytic Services (n.d.), in its newly released survey with top U.S. corporations, claimed that more than three-quarters (79%) of the 2,100 organizations surveyed said that they are currently using social media channels (58%) to launch social media initiatives (21%). As Stelzner (2009) discovered in another study, business owners are more likely to use social media marketing (90%) than employees working for a business (81%). In terms of their actual use of social media, sole proprietors and owners of businesses of 2 to 100 employees mentioned that they have been doing social media marketing for years while 72% of marketers have either just star ted or have been using social media for only a few months (Stelzner, 2009). These data indicate that the rise in the use of social me

Identifying Language Creativity In Everyday English Essay

Identifying Language Creativity In Everyday English - Essay Example Language creativity, as stated earlier, can be found in several different linguistic practices. It is identified in different ways. Some are unexpected; others are common to many people who are keen on utterances by different individuals in movie films and other physical functions or conversations. One comes across or bumps into it in things from advertisements, televisions news or literature banners. For instance, young children may engage in talking and making jokes as they play or engage themselves in their day-to-day activities. The idea that kids are able to tell, as well as, receive jokes indicates that they have the capability of recognizing creativity in some communications or jokes made by colleagues. In other words, jokes are mainly creativity done to amuse other people. Creativity is the central component of joke composition. Without creativity, a joke no longer becomes a joke, but a normal declarative or inquisitive statement.   In addition to the above, children also l ike telling stories and fairy tales amongst themselves. This is one of the productive uses of the mind making them creative. A point to note is that as the kids tell stories or fairy tales, they come up with ways in which the stories can be modified to ensure that they become more enjoyable than before. Modification of these stories is a necessity with change in time. For instance, it would be boring to tell a 21st century kid a story using the styles and manners in which the 20thy century kids were told the same story. In other words, some elements of creativity in the language used must be included to cope up with the constant changing environment. Besides, it is notable that it is in early childhood when creativity in linguistic occurs in a rapid and interesting manner. Guy Cook (2000) cautioned parents that linguistic play, mainly among the kids can sometimes lead to other undesirable consequences like paying less attention to school work and the general academic developments. Cook made a discovery that children who are mainly involved in story-telling and other language game activities often show little interest in their school work. They instead seem to be keener in entering the world of â€Å"make-believe† in varieties of forms from bed time stories to simple and addictive computer games. Analytically, school work also acts as an important booster to language creativity. When children attend schools, they do so with one aim of education to promote interaction and all round development among the children. For instance, the interaction in school may provide another platform for language creativity such as reciting tongue twisters and singing songs. This will

Legal Positivism and Human Rights

Legal Positivism and Human Rights 1.0 INTRODUCTION The statement which I have to scrutinise â€Å"Is the absolute separation of law and morality proposed by legal positivism an obstacle to the acceptance of the notion of human rights?† for us to evaluate this statement first we have to understand legal positivism and the roots of human rights. Then I would discuss why law and morality cannot be seperated and if seperated its adverse affects and how human rights and positive law should be amalgamated. 2.0 LEGAL POSITIVISM Legal positivism is a mentality in legalism that the existence and content of law should depend on social facts and not on merits.[1] It is the view that morality has no weight in the law that is made and established as the law of the state. It should be followed and it is supreme however immoral or unjust that piece of law or legislation is. There are several legal thinkers who developed the idea of legal positivism, amongst them the most prominent figures are Jeremy Bentham, John Austin and HLA Hart. What we must keep in mind is that even positivists are divided into 2, inclusive and exclusive positivism. Inclusive positivists are people who believe that moral constraints can be incorporated into law according to a society’s belief. Even HLA Hart was an inclusive (soft) positivist who believe that â€Å"the rule of recognition may incorporate as criteria of legal validity conformity with moral principles or substantive values †¦Ã¢â‚¬ [2] On the other hand are the exclusive positivists who believe that a legal system cannot integrate moral restraints on legal validity. They believe in the absolute supremacy of the positive law. One of prominent exclusive (hard) positivists was Joseph Raz who was actually a student of HLA Hart. 3.0 NATURAL LAW AND DERIVATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS FROM NATURAL LAW Natural law is the direct opposite of positive law, and is what is defined as god’s law or ideal law, which has no loop holes as in manmade law. It is law which is based on morality rather than legality believing that any man made law which is not morally correct is not law at all. Naturalists argue that positive law is always evolving to attain the threshold of natural law. Some prominent figures who argued for the supremacy of natural law and morality were St. Thomas Aquinas and Thomas Hobbes. The foundation of natural law is religious beliefs and moral rights and wrongs as shown throughout history. The notion of human rights, I believe, is derived from natural rights, which in turn is derived from religious and moral beliefs. So the international bill of human rights we see today actually is a child of natural law itself. John locke, a follower of Thomas Hobbes, and a renowned philosopher, while writing about natural rights in Two Treatises Of Government, has said that â€Å"men are by nature free and equal against claims that God had made all people naturally subject to a monarch. He argued that people have rights, such as the right to life, liberty, and property that have a foundation independent of the laws of any particular society† [3] This is exactly what is entrenched in the International Bill of Human rights today. So it is logically arguable, and it is my belief that Human rights is actually natural law/ natural rights itself, in another form, trying to impose supremacy over positive law just like in the eras passed. Thus if natural law is not accepted as being a part of positive law, human rights can never be truly accepted. 4.0 WHY LAW AND MORALITY CANNOT AND SHOULD NOT BE SEPERATED The debate for the separation of moral and legal rights is a heated debate still ongoing. One of the most remarkable statements regarding this topic was made between HLA Hart and Lon L. Fuller, the latter stating that legal and moral rights can never be separated. Hart argued that there should be a strict separation of law and morality, he denied that there are universally shared necessary moral standards of legal validity and he also denied that an individual recognizes law as good law based on morality and that individuals may do it based on purely non moral considerations.[4] Fuller argued that law and morality cannot be separated because they are naturally connected. He found the connection between law and morality in the very heart of positivism, the law makers. He gave 8 ways to fail to make a law stating that these rules are necessary as they make an â€Å"inner morality of law†. [5] In his Journal article Positivism and the Inseparability of Law and Morals, Leslie Green has argued that law and morals in fact cannot be separated and instead of the mistaken separability test he had brought into light the underlying fallibility test. [6] Keeping the philosophers arguments aside we can take a scenario to consider what would happen if law and morality were strictly separated. If the law making body, the parliament, if they believed in this strict separation and if they had no sense of moral values in their society while making law, and if they passed a legislation which is incompatible with the society beliefs, it would cause havoc. The government that passes such a bill is destined to fall as proved by history with Margaret Thatcher’s demise after passing the poll tax. For example if they passed a bill allowing gay marriage in a strictly Wahhabi Muslim society, it is bound to be met with hatred and might be taken as an insult by the society. 5.0 AMALGAMATING HUMAN RIGHTS AND POSITIVE LAW One can say that the notion of human rights have already been incorporated with positive law of UK after the enactment of Human Rights Act of 1998. Its entrenched nature and per s.3 of the Act all legislation passed, have to be compatible with Individual human rights.[7] And if any legislation is incompatible with human rights courts can declare it incompatible under s4 of the HRA 1998 and advise the parliament to make the necessary rectifications.[8] This power of the HRA 1998 can be shown in the recent case of R (Royal College of Nursing) v SSHD (2010) [9]where Schedule 3 to the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act (SVGA) 2006 was incompatible with Art 6 as the listed person was denied the right to make representations in advance of being listed. The Section 67(2) and (6) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 came into being to amend this Schedule as a result. 6.0 POSITIVE LAW: SUPREME IN UK As we know UK is a dualist country meaning it does not heed to international laws or EU laws. It needs its domestic laws to be enacted by the parliament for them to be legally enforceable. This results in a supreme parliament which can bend law at whim (as can be shown in the delay enacting HRA 1998). Even the power vested in courts by HRA 1998 in the form of declaration of incompatibility is a toothless remedy when dealing with an unjust legislature. Because these declarations are not authoritative, they are just persuasive, so the parliament is does have a choice to keep the legislation as it is in spite of declaration of incompatibility. Another thing which shows the supremacy of positive law in UK, is the Prime ministers hinting on the repealing of the HRA 1998 without a proper backup plan. [10] 7.0 ACCEPTING HUMAN RIGHTS AS MORAL CLAIMS OR POSITIVE LAW While analyzing the given statement I came upon two ways in which it could be addressed and according to that I could give my opinion on the validity of the statement. Those two ways are, that human rights could be accepted as moral claims as the statement suggests and then we can evaluate how the separation of morality and law could affect the acceptance of human rights. The second way is that we could claim that human rights is no longer moral claims but positive law, and then see how the separation of law and morality affects it. 7.1 ACCEPTING HUMAN RIGHTS AS MORAL CLAIMS If Human rights are moral claims as the statement suggests then it is vital not to have any separation between law and morality. If law and morality is strictly separated as the ideal positivist suggests[11] then human rights won’t have the supremacy and power it needs to universally protect the rights of individuals. They need to overcome any form of positive law which clashes with it. Human rights are normally accepted as having their basis in morality because natural rights was derived from religious beliefs. I, believe that, both human rights and equity are children of natural law, and for in order for them to be successful, they need to incorporated with positive law but be powerful enough to overcome shackles of positive law. Though the supremacy of equity is not disputed, the supremacy of human rights is. If human rights are moral claims which has no legal validity, accepting them would be difficult in the light of the separability thesis brought forward by Hart[12]. If legal positivism is the right mindset and if the Human rights have no legal value, how are the rights of people going to be universally protected? How can one accept Human rights? For example, if a country passes horrific laws which infringe the most inviolable rights and if there is no way it can be remedied, the world would fall into chaos. If UK passed a law which says all men shorter than 5 ‘5 should be killed, and if the UDHR has no legal power, no authority, how are the right to life of many people going to be protected? One might say, the parliament would not pass such a bill, but what is stopping them from doing so? There are no legal restrictions to a supreme parliament as in UK, the only thing restraining the legislators from passing such legislation is just one thing. Their moral values. In this context, I would agree with the view of Leslie Green in his article positivism and the inseparability of law and morals[13], where he has argued at length that the separation thesis is actually a mistake and had upheld the fallibility thesis. 7.2 ACCEPTING HUMAN RIGHTS AS POSITIVE LAW I find it more suitable to say, that Human rights is no longer moral claims, after the passing of the International Bill of Human rights (Universal Declaration of Human rights 1948, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 1966 and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966) the notion of Human rights is now actually positive law. The heart of this international Bill of Human rights, the Universal Declaration of Human rights 1948, which prescribes inviolable rights for humans, regardless of where they are born, has been endorsed by most/all the countries in the world. But the problem is, dualist countries like UK, might not endorse the Declaration into their constitution (as can be inferred from their delay in enacting HRA 1998 and the unavailability of remedies for such issues until the enactment of the Act). My belief, that the notion for human rights is no longer moral claims and is universal, can be proved by various incidents. Human rights is no longer based on religious or moral rights and wrongs. I say this, because immorality is a subjective query, it will change from person to person and society to society and from era to era. For example, in a strict Muslim community it might be immoral to wear clothes which expose a lot of skin, but in a modern rainbow society, it might be taken as a norm. For example in USA, women would consider it immoral and against their belief to wear clothes showing their waist, but in India women consider it immoral to show their hair thus wear clothes that cover their hair but they don’t mind wearing Saris which expose their waist. So if we were to consider that Human rights to be based on moral claims, it can never be universally accepted because what is moral, is subjective. But this is not the case; Saudi Arabia and Irans pressure to make the Cairo Declaration of Human rights in Islam of 1990, to be accepted as the â€Å"Islamic† alternative to international human rights, during the 1993 World Conference on Human rights in Vienna was strongly rejected by the UN Secretary General Kofi Anna, who maintained that the human rights are universal. Thus, as moral claims change from time to time, society to society, individual to individual, human rights is no longer moral, as it is universal and invariable, wherever the individual is. So I believe that through the sands of time, human rights have actually evolved into positive law now. Since it is positive law, the separation of law and morality proposed by positivism, no longer has any effect on the acceptance of the concept of Human rights. 8.0 CONUCLUSION The notion of human rights cannot be accepted without accepting the role of morality in positive law. Because if the statement is correct and if Human rights is indeed moral claims then morality needs to be accepted for it to be incorporated into legal systems today. But I find it more suitable to say, that Human rights is no longer moral claims, after the passing of the International Bill of Human rights) the notion of Human rights is now actually positive law. Since it is positive law now, the separation of law and morality proposed by positivism no longer has any effect on the concept of Human rights. The other thing which must be brought into light is that even though human rights is entrenched into the legal system of UK it is not properly followed. If it was properly followed, how can Acts, with provisions which infringe rights of people such as section 44 of Terrorism Act 2000 get enacted? How do they pass the scrutiny of parliament without being noticed? The fact they make it through the parliament shows the weakness of positive law and its failure to protect people’s rights. The present regime of UK has been hinting on repealing HRA 1998[14] and withdraw out of EU(though now being denied by David Cameron[15]), but this would only make human rights lose its positive law status in UK and result in more infringement of rights. Repealing the HRA 1998 might not be a bad idea with the proper preparations and a backup Act or Bill of Rights which is set in stone and has much superior power than HRA 1998 (as the declaration of incompatibility is a toothless remedy which does not enforce the parliament to amend an incompatible legislation). So I believe if HRA 1998 is repealed it should be substituted by a stronger Bill of Rights which has a better remedy than declarations of incompatibility etc. And if such a bill is passed, the legal validity of human rights would no longer be in doubt. The bill which was withdrawn at the end of the debate on 1st March 2013, Human Rights Act 1998 (Repeal and Substitution) Bill 2012-13, certainly lacked this forceful authority. [16] Word Count is 2524 (Excluding Contents and Bibliography) 9.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY 9.1 Table of Cases R (Royal College of Nursing) v SSHD [2010] EWHC 2761 9.2 Table of Statutes Human Rights Act Section 3 Section 4 9.3 Text books Hart, H. L. A.Concept of Law.Oxford: Clarendon, 1994. Print Fuller, L. L.: The Morality of Law. New Haven and London 1961 ebook. 9.4 Articles Green, Leslie, Positivism and the Inseparability of Law and Morals. New York University Law Review, Forthcoming; Oxford Legal Studies Research Paper No. 15/2008. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1136374 accessed 04th January 2014 Green, Leslie, Legal Positivism, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.),accessed 04th January 2014 URL = . Tuckness, Alex, Lockes Political Philosophy,The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy(Winter 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta(ed.), accessed on 05th January 2014 URL = . 9.5 Websites Mason, Rowena. David Cameron Eyes Human Rights Act Repeal.Theguardian.com. Guardian News and Media, 08 Aug. 2013. Web. 05 Jan. 2014. . David Cameron Rejects EU Withdrawal Calls and Attacks Tory pessimists'Theguardian.com. Guardian News and Media, 09 May 2013. Web. 05 Jan. 2014. . Human Rights Act 1998 (Repeal and Substitution) Bill.Human Rights Act 1998 (Repeal and Substitution) Bill. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Jan. 2014. . [1] Green, Leslie, Legal Positivism, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.),accessed 04th January 2014 URL = . [2] Hart, H. L. A.Concept of Law.Oxford: Clarendon, 1994. Print. P250 [3] Tuckness, Alex, Lockes Political Philosophy,The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy(Winter 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta(ed.), accessed on 05th January 2014 URL = . [4] Hart, H. L. A.Concept of Law.Oxford: Clarendon, 1994. Print. P198 [5] Fuller, L. L.: The Morality of Law. New Haven and London 1961 eBook. P39-42 [6] Green, Leslie, Positivism and the Inseparability of Law and Morals. New York University Law Review, Forthcoming; Oxford Legal Studies Research Paper No. 15/2008. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1136374 [7] Section 3 Human Rights Act 1998 [8] Section 4 Human Rights Act 1998 [9] R (Royal College of Nursing) v SSHD [2010] EWHC 2761 [10] Mason, Rowena. David Cameron Eyes Human Rights Act Repeal.Theguardian.com. Guardian News and Media, 08 Aug. 2013. Web. 05 Jan. 2014. . [11] Hart, H. L. A.Concept of Law.Oxford: Clarendon, 1994. Print [12] Green, Leslie, Legal Positivism, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.),accessed 04th January 2014 URL = . [13] Green, Leslie, Positivism and the Inseparability of Law and Morals. New York University Law Review, Forthcoming; Oxford Legal Studies Research Paper No. 15/2008. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1136374 [14] Mason, Rowena. David Cameron Eyes Human Rights Act Repeal.Theguardian.com. Guardian News and Media, 08 Aug. 2013. Web. 05 Jan. 2014. . [15] David Cameron Rejects EU Withdrawal Calls and Attacks Tory pessimists'Theguardian.com. Guardian News and Media, 09 May 2013. Web. 05 Jan. 2014. . [16] Human Rights Act 1998 (Repeal and Substitution) Bill.Human Rights Act 1998 (Repeal and Substitution) Bill. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Jan. 2014. .

Fluke, or, I Know Why the Winged Whale Sings Chapter 10~11

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Cause And Effect Of The Spill - 1315 Words

On the Easter Sunday of March 24, 1989 an oil tanker destined for Long Beach, California was stopped short of its destination when it struck the Prince William Sound’s Bligh Reef (PWS). In charge of the ship was Captain Joseph Jeffrey Hazelwood. It was reported that Captain Hazelwood was not at the bridge of the ship during the incident. Furthermore he was accused of alcohol intoxication that might have contributed to the event. This event caused a catastrophic oil spill that resulted in 11 million gallons of crude oil spreading throughout the ocean. At that time, it was considered the largest oil that had ever happened in the United States, hence, it was expected to have devastating effects on the ecology and the different species living†¦show more content†¦In charge of the ship was Captain Joseph Hazelwood. At the time of the time incident, Hazelwood was reported to be in his stateroom while leaving Third Mate Gregory Cousins in charge. This led to the failure of t he ship to return to the shipping lanes and eventually thrashing through the Bligh Reef. Although Captain Hazelwood was accused and charged of alcohol intoxication while on duty, Captain Hazelwood was acquitted of that charge, instead the state charged him with a misdemeanor negligence. This misdemeanor gave Hazelwood a $50,000 fine and 1000 hour of community service. Nearly twenty seven years ago is when the event took place and yet there are still thousands of gallons of oil that pollute the beaches near Prince William Sound. The oil found in the beach still has it adverse effects on the ecosystem near the shore. Although, observations have led for most to believe that natural removal of the oil will take place overtime, a decline in the rate of oil removal have proved them otherwise. From 1989 to 1992, the annual rate for natural oil removal was at 80%, the following years of 1989 to 2001 took a staggering decline at a rate of 22%. After 2001, a mere 4% rate was all that was left to defend the oiled shore of Prince William Sound. Efforts to clean the oil proved to be difficult due to its remote location and reachable only by air and sea