Concept of Organisational Misbehaviour: Analysis

Concept of Organisational Misbehaviour: Analysis Organisational Misbehavior Critically evaluate the argument that organisational misbehavior is a ‘normal’ feature of organisational life Introduction The notion of organisational misbehavior can be interpreted in a lot of ways based on different perspectives, different people, shifting situations, and by the changing level of awareness and understanding on the life of an organisation. There is a primary purpose of organisations in the context of fulfilling certain individual goals. Northcraft and Neale (1990, p.5) say that people come together and form organisations because organisations can accomplish things that are beyond the reach of individuals. They come together to accomplish what each individual cannot accomplish alone. The meaning of behavior in organisations according to Northcraft and Neale revolve around managing behavior to take advantage of the performance benefits of groups over individuals. This is where the concept of a good behavior and misbehavior takes shape. Organisational Behavior Organisational behavior is a multidisciplinary definition that illustrates a number of points (Gibson et al, 2000). Some of these points relate directly to the conduct of the organisation in society. First, it indicates that the behavior of people operate at individual, group, or organisational level. This suggests that when trying to study the organisational misbehavior in the perspective of being a normal part of organisational life, it must identify clearly the levels of analysis – individual, group, and the organisation being used. Second, there’s a distinctively humanistic orientation within the organisation behavior. People’s attitudes, perceptions, learning capabilities, and objectives are important to the organisation. They provide the rich mixture for their organisation’s culture and strategies to evolve and prosper. Thirdly, the external environment is seen as having significant impact on the organisational behavior. Finally, there’s also the application orientation which concerns providing useful answers to questions that arise in the context of managing the organisation. Misbehavior is often interpreted to mean ‘bad behavior’ or a deviation from the normal norms and ethics expected of individuals and organisations. To say that organisational behavior also involves other certain kinds of misbehavior still descends to the fact that any type of behavior can be either good or bad depending on the context that it is applied to in real life situations. When this type of behavior exists and eventually prevails in any organisational setup, it would likely grow into a certain stature of normalcy and seep into conventional wisdom. In order to understand why this argument seems to make sense in the framework of an organisation’s life, it is important to first identify the different compositions of an organisation, its objectives, culture, structure, and strategies. The complexities associated with these compositions have made it virtually impossible to model and envision a ‘perfect’ organisation. Organisations have had some bouts with internal and external conflicts in one way or another. Some have mastered the arts of deception and impropriety. It is unrealistic to say that organisational misbehavior is not part of organisational life either. People in the organisation may misbehave and some people may blame the entire organisation. Others may blame specific people (especially managers) when the real shortcoming came from the organisation’s policies. Other groups within the organisation or network may deviate from agreements and norms. The organisational culture may not also be up to the times and the current business strategies may not sit well with government regulation policies and industry norms. If these things do happen (and they happen a lot), it is not viable and healthy to draw the line between laying out unspoken rules in classifying organisational behavior to be good and a bad. People and Human Behavior People make up the internal social system of the organisation (Newstrom and Davis, 1997). This system consists of individuals and groups, and large groups as well as small ones. People are the living, thinking, and feeling beings who work in the organisation to achieve their objectives. An organisational structure is filled up with people who decide and deliver the goods for the organisation. Diversity presents a lot of challenges for management to handle. When people become members of an organisation whether in official, unofficial or informal capacity, they bring with them different educational background, talents, interests, and behavior that they eventually contribute for the success or failure of the organisation. The relationship among individuals and groups in an organisation create expectations for an individual’s behavior (Gibson et al, 2000, p. 7). An individual can be presented here as the organisation itself. These expectations result in certain leadership and foll ower roles that must be performed so that there will be some kind of order and system. Collective expectations can either conform or not to standard behavior. Collective misuse of resources interests, talents, expertise, and management strategies can constitute organisation misbehavior. Punch (1996, p.1) views these misconduct as harmful to the viability of the organisation and constitutes deviance by the organisation. To put it more bluntly, organisational misbehavior eventually boils down to the issue of profits and how it should be maximized. Money has always been a central issue in any organisation and it has often been used to measure the survivability of a business. Organisational goals always take into their mainstream policy the issue of financial and economic stability and prosperity. Punch (1996, p.214) strongly suggested that formal goals of the organisation thus constitute a ‘front’ for the real goals of management which is to provide a money machine for its owners and other insiders. If it is already common and normal for criminals to use any tool or weapon to perpetuate a crime, it would also seem normal for organisations to use the organisation itself to obtain money from ‘victims’ of its misbehavior. The ‘victims’ may actually be the customers or the members themselves. It is a prime example of what is called the â€Å"organisational weapon† – the organisation is for white-collar criminals as the gun or knife is for the common criminals (Wheeler and Rothman, 1982, cited in Punch, 1996). In short, an organisation is set up for the primary purpose of making a substantial amount of money in the form of a profit and improving the quality of life for the individual members of the organisation. Organisations have systems of authority, status, and power, and people in organisations have varying needs for each system. People need money and a sense of fulfillment. People also need power to impose their will to others. People want to attain a certain level of success as measured by their status and standing in the organisation. Taken as a whole, organisations follow certain types of ethical behavior and standards defined along its objectives and future goals. It is also believed that adherence to moral standards on the job can have positive outcomes on the organisation and society by promoting strong ethical behavior in any aspects of life (Mares, 2005). This strong behavior of one organisation can be used as a strong issue against another organisation which is considered to be ‘misbehaving’ just because it was not able to adhere to certain moral standards previously attained. Organisational Structure An organisational structure defines the formal relationship and use of people in organisations. According to Newstrom and Devis (1997), different jobs are required to accomplish all of an organisation’s activities. There are managers, employees, accountants, assemblers, and others who have to be related in some structural way so that their work can be effectively coordinated. How is the structure of the organisation related to the conduct of an organisation? According to Thompson (1997, p.588), structure is the means by which the organisation seeks to achieve its strategic objectives and implement strategies and strategic changes. Assuming that these strategies and changes are concerned with relating the organisation’s resources to its goals, will these resources be used in the proper way acceptable to all in the society? If change is necessary, it is correct to point out that resistance to change can constitute another concept of misbehavior. People confronting changes in their working environments often exhibit dysfunctional behaviors like aggression, projection, and avoidance (Hirschheim, 1995 p. 160). These types of behavioral patterns affect the overall behavior of the organisation. Another thing to consider in the organisational structure is the way decision making is delegated and observed. Thompson described the extent by which a decentralized and centralized setup of management decision making is vital in adapting to strategic change. In a centralized setup, organisational misbehavior is usually highlighted at the top management level because only a handful of people are empowered to do the decision making. A decentralized setup allows decisions to be made by most people who must implement change and usually allows the organisation a more collective approach to making decisions based on what is morally and ethically correct. This statement however, does not imply that a decentralized structure eliminates instances of misbehavior. It only lessens the probability. On the other hand, a decentralized setup could empower smaller groups within the organisation to abuse their power and open the possibility of misbehavior on a smaller scale. According to Tsahuridu, specialization and division of work that occurs in organizations may make people in organizations unable to see the illegality and immorality of certain actions. Each action is a part of a chain of actions, and even though each individual act may be legitimate and moral, all the actions linked together may constitute an illegal or immoral activity, which each individual participant may be ignorant of. Organisational Objectives and Culture Organisations must have objectives in order to exist. Objectives are always centered on what is basically ‘good’ for the organisation, whether the resulting action or consequences is ‘bad’. How is organisational objectives tied to organisational behavior? Profit and growth are means to other ends rather than objectives in themselves (Acoff, 1986, cited in Thompson, 1997). There is then a question of whether profit is the ultimate objective of profit seeking business organisations or whether it is merely a means to other ends, which themselves constitute the real objectives (Thompson, 1997, p.153). Organisational behavior can be better understood by assuming whether the real goal of the organisation is to maximize profit or to provide them with a good quality of life and better standard of living. Harris and Hartman (2002, p. 75) said that an organisation’s culture consists of the values, norms, and attitudes of the people who make up the organisation. Values show what is important; norms reveal expected behavior; attitudes show the mind-set of individuals. Organisational culture therefore tells people what is important in the organisation, how to behave, and how to see things. Culture is a part of organisational life that influences the behavior, attitudes, and overall effectiveness of members (Gibson et al, 2000). Managers are usually in the forefront of formulating organisational strategies and policies. Johnson and Scholes (1997, p.79-80) argued that in formulating policies, managers should regard experience (good or bad) as constraints on developments. They say that in order to develop the organisation to cope with today’s changing environments, they need to challenge the people around them and experiment with their different ideas and conflicting views in a pluralistic approach. The job of top management therefore is to create this sort of organisation by building teams that can work in such ways through the development of the everyday behavior and culture of the organisation. All of the issues related to the organisation in general have a tendency to influence and affect the behavior of the organisation. While it is safe to assume that the notion of misbehavior in the organisation tends to focus on the ‘wrong’ or ‘negative’ side of the organisation, it is preferred that misbehavior should be ‘corrected’ and dealt with by focusing on how to manage and institute reforms in the different aspects of the organisation. This is a tall and complex order. Organisational behavior is not only influenced by the different factors previously mentioned. Management policies have a tendency to adapt to changing situations in their environments. Some organisations’ strategies may take advantage of ‘weak’ government policies and regulations and find loopholes with which they can misbehave without being noticed. Other organisations’ strategies tend to focus on covering up unethical practices with good and conv incing arguments that their actions go against standard practices but at the same time, benefit a large segment of society. Punch (1996, p.1) described the behavior of today’s organisations as problematic and worrying. He reasons out that different kinds of organisational misbehavior are often caused by managers ‘lending’ themselves to deviant activities and the inability of government, business, and regulatory agencies to control effectively such misbehavior. He explains that this was largely because the subjects of business crime and corporate deviance have been sadly neglected by criminologists and crime-fighting bodies in favor of other areas such as street crimes, low-level law enforcement, and the prison system. Almost everyday, new types of organisation misbehavior are being uncovered and brought out into the open. As these corporate scandals and other forms of financial misconduct often perpetuated by top level management are exposed, more and more sophisticated strategies and techniques are slowly being uncovered. It is quite interesting to know that one kind of misbehavior can be linked to another form of misbehavior in another corporate partner within the network of organisations. Other sets of misbehavior can involve almost all levels of the organisational hierarchy. The realities faced by an organisation are different from others. Each organisation has an identity, an objective, a strategic plan, and differing sets of policies and regulations. Harris and Hartman (2002, p. 97) said this is because the underlying premise in the ideal culture is that the formal organisation’s norms and values are to be consistent with those of the various individuals and groups within the organisation. They say that the norms and values of individuals and groups of the organisation are hostile to formal organisational goals. This is especially true to members of top-level management and the rank and file members. Their hidden values may contradict the official policies of the organisation. Sometimes, the organisation may not value the potential contribution of its members. The need to create competitive advantage for profit and growth without the proper ethical system in place can lead to drastic steps and ethically questionable decisions and actions. Some m embers of the organisation may feel the need to make reforms while others may think taking radical steps will eventually spell success. Discontentment and trouble may brew over different ‘signals’ and messages that the inner structure of the organisation send out to the outside world. It is therefore evident that culture can become very counterproductive and the basis of confidence, cooperation, and adherence to standard norms and behavior can be damaging to the overall behavior of the organisation. This is the start of the decay of organisational values and norms and provides a fertile ground for breeding misconduct and misbehavior in any front of the organisation. Conclusions Misbehavior is a normal part of an organisation’s life. It is not a question of whether it exists or not. It tends to become an issue when organisations tolerate and do nothing to correct these deviances from normal behavior and when organisations formulate policies that sheer away from ethical standards that govern them. Why is it that organisational misbehaviors tend to exist even in model companies and organisations recognized for their professional excellence? There are different ways of understanding organisational misbehavior in the context of whether it is normal or not in an organisational life. If we try to look closely at the term ‘normal’ and ‘misbehavior,’ there are two things which would come into mind. First, nothing is perfect and it is perfectly normal for people to commit mistakes, either willingly or unwillingly. People can always create rules and policies to counter certain misconduct. Organisations can always innovate and deviate from these rules in order to attain their goals. In these instances, there is no such thing as a perfect law governing businesses and there is also no such thing as a perfect business strategy. In normal instances, mistakes are part of the learning process. As this cycle continues today, organisational misbehavior has already come to the point where people have already considered it part and parcel of their everyday life. It is part of the reality of life that has something to do with existence and how mankind adapts to ongoing changes. The only thing that people consider to be an issue in organisation misbehavior is the level or degree of how it affects society. Second, in order to survive, some organisations have to take the risk, whether this will put them in the burner for good or elevate their status in the business community. These risks are normally present in their business strategies, structure, objectives, and culture. They can follow the business rules by the book and end up earning nothing or they may deviate from certain rules and norms and reap profits. Again, it is normal for organisations to take risks and reap the benefits. All of the characteristics of an organisation are linked to one another to form their own identity and behavior. People are in a social structure within the organisation and are empowered to make good or bad decisions. The structure of the organisation limits or expands the power to make decisions. Bibliography Books Gibson, James et al. (2000).Organizations: Behavior, Structure, Processes. 3rd edition. McGraw-Hill, Manila. Harris, J and Hartman, S. (2002). Organizational Behavior. Haworth Press. New York. Hirschheim, R.A. (1995). Office Automation: A Social and Organizational Perspective. John Wiley. Oxford Johnson, Gerry and Scholes, Kevan. (1997). Exploring Corporate Strategy.Prentice Hall. UK Newstrom, John and Davis, Keith. (1997) Organizational Behavior: Human Behavior at Work. McGraw-Hill. Northcraft, Gregory and Neale, Margaret.(1990).Organizational Behavior:A Management Challenge. Dryden Press, Florida. Punch, Maurice. (1996). Dirty Business: Exploring Corporate Misconduct. SAGE Publications, London. Thompson, John (1997).Strategic Management: Awareness and Change. 3rd Edition.International Thompson Business Press.Boston Journal Article Mares, Micheal (2005), â€Å"The Importance of Business Ethics†,Retrieved last February 26, 2005 from http://www.webcpa.com Tsuahurido, Eva, â€Å"Ethics and Integrity: What Australian Organizations Seek and Offer in Recruitment Advertisements†,Retrieved: March 3, 2005 from http://www.pamij.com/7_4/v7n4_tsahuridu.html

My Psychosocial Stage of Development Essay

My Psychosocial Stage of Development S. Pulliam April, 2011 First I would like to define psychosocial development; this is the development of the personality or the acquisition of social attitude and skill from infancy through maturity. Based on the charting from Erickson’s Psychosocial Stages of Development, I fall into two separate categories based on my age. From the beliefs of Erickson, he believed that the achievements and failures of earlier stages influence later stages, whereas later stages modify and transform earlier ones (Erickson, 1980). The first is Young Adulthood and the second is Middle Adulthood. In the two stages from the chart the information is based on (Young adulthood) Intimacy v/s Isolation and the second one (Middle Adulthood) is based on Generativity v/s Stagnation Work and Parenthood Adults. Although there are two separate stages in the psychosocial stages that I fall under, I feel that I am at the midpoint for each and I have decided to consider both aspects in doing my psychosocial stages of development. To explain how the two stages correlate to my life, I decided in the last year to settle down and get married this is based on my young adulthood information from Erickson’s chart. The reason there is a correlation to my life based on Erickson’s chart under middle adulthood id because my life had children prior to the marriage but I am taking a more active role in being involved with activities and school when it comes to my children. In looking at my current psychosocial stage of development influence on my behavior and relationship, I find that I am a calm, and not hard to get along with even under pressure situations that has occurred with us based on my jealous tendencies and insecure ways because of previous relationship and not being with the father of my children. The influence that I see in young adulthood over my relationship is that there is a need for intimacy but not a major desire to have it on a regular basis. The isolation comes from not being so open and friendly to other males in my life or surrounding because of my relationship with my husband. I have male friends that I am social with but I do not allow the intimacy line to be crossed because of my relationship with my husband. The influence that I see in middle adulthood is the need to have a nurturing relationship with my children and creating a positive change to benefit my children lives. In looking at this I made changes in the way I approached my children and how I would not shelter them from the truth when they would ask me questions but give them true answer to their question. As small children I did not feel the need to give much explanation to my children’s questions but now I try to explain everything to them without being untruthful to them or give them false ideas about what is going on around them. To explain the positive and negative outcomes to psychosocial stages of development, I would have to say that there are many positive and negative but the few that stand out to me the most are. First negative outcome, getting over insecurities I had about the intimacy relationship that I chose to take on after breaking off a 10 year relationship with my children’s father. The second negative outcome was getting over the trust issues I had before going into the current marriage that I am in right now. The third negative outcome was getting pass the change of personality and ways I had to endure going into the marriage and getting use to a new personality and making the changes on both parts to make our marriage work to the best of our ability. Based on this information I feel that the positive outcomes to the psychosocial stages of Erickson were in a good way and I can see the difference in my life and marriage. First positive outcome was that I am able to trust again within my relationship with my husband. The second positive outcome was that I made a strong bond with my children and I have not only been a mother to my children but I am the friend that my children confide in when they have feeling they want to express. The third positive outcome I see is that I am calm and stress free with the way I deal with problem within my relationship and I am able to compromise with my spouse when we do not agree on things. In evaluating how other developmental issues have influenced my personality, I would have to say that during my early childhood life I dealt with a few attachment issues with my mother. I feel that during this stage I did not bond with my mother like most children tend to do when the mother is present because she was pre-occupied with her career as a teacher and coaching. So during this age I was in close relationship with my father and I never felt the true connection with myself and my mother like so many girls or women tend to have with a mother. Most of my time I spent with my father and aunts when I was in my early childhood age so I did not really know that much about my mother other than she coached and taught physical education. I admired what she did so I took on the quest of becoming a physical education teacher as well. In School age time I had to bare a lot of pressure in participating in sports and in my school work because the expectation was so high on me to achieve my education and athletic abilities because of what my mother represented in our community. At the same time I was pressured by other students because they felt that the only reason I made the team was because of my mother not because of my own ability. Once I graduated my goals with education were so different. I felt more of the need to help others in crisis situation so I went back to school to get my degree in mental health and social work and that is still my drive today. So from this experience I feel that I have a very strong personality in spite of the way so many tried to bring me down and I am a true fighter for what I believe in deep within my heart. My personality from what I can see is a driving force of who I am and I refuse to be compared to my mother in my quest to achieve greater feats in my life and the way I live my life. It is okay to be compared to her but I know that I could never be my mother or even like her because my drive and ambition is so different from the way she handles things. References http://www. support4change. com/stages/cycles/Erikson. html Erikson E. , 1980. Identity and the Life Cycle. Norton, New York http://currentnursing. com/nursing_theory/theory_of_psychosocial_development. html

Theme Of Manipulation In Julius Caesar - 1104 Words

When manipulation is used to achieve the goals of few, it ends up causing more damage to the lives of many. This is shown throughout the Tragedy of Julius Caesar, by guards, wives, citizens, and especially, by Cassius and Antony. Ambition is each of their flaws, and they both act as catalysts for the plot, further escalating the situation in Rome, after the death of Pompey. Wars are started, innocents are killed, and lives are ruined, due to manipulation and its impacts on others. It’s not just a fictional thing either, manipulation is everywhere, and it’s had real-life consequences. However, the tale of Julius Caesar does a great illustrating its lasting effects. As a result of the motives of Cassius and Antony, the use of manipulation to†¦show more content†¦After the murder of Caesar, Antony is filled with rage and a lust for revenge. Unlike nieve Brutus, Antony is clever, sly, and calculating, and he begs the conspirators to kill him now if they have to. Br utus doesn’t want to be seen as a butcher, and mistakenly thinks only Caesar was ambitious. Antony sees this and pretends to make peace with the conspirators. He goes up to each one of them and shakes their hand giving a similar offering of an alliance, â€Å"Let each man render me his bloody hand / First Marcus Brutus, will I shake with you.† (Shakespeare, Julius Caesar III.i.194-196) In reality, it is a hit list, of who to kill first, starting with Brutus. Once he’s gained their trust, he is allowed to speak at the funeral of Caesar, he is allowed to display the body, and he is left alone. This allows him to anger the plebeians, starting the rioting, civil war, and further tragedy. Antony’s mastery over influence and words wrongfully played off of the naivety and ignorance of the plebeians. Once Antony gained the trust of the conspirators, and was allowed to speak at Caesars, funeral to display the body, he used manipulation to control of the citizens. Antony’s speech reinforced their trust and love for Caesar while making them question whether Brutus was truly an â€Å"honourable man.† To make sure the citizens trust him, he says, â€Å"For I have neither, wit, nor words, norShow MoreRelatedTheme Of Manipulation In Julius Caesar724 Words   |  3 Pagesshowing their true colors to benefit themselves for success. Those people also usually master deception to trick others into accepting artificial personalities before revealing the truth. Shakespeare uses the character Cassius in Julius Caesar, to show how manipulation is done by demonstrating inner thoughts, the comparison of characters, and writing of letters throughout the play. For instance, the character Cassius uses his inner thoughts of to take control of Brutus’ thinking. Cassius states,Read MoreRhetoric and Betrayal in Julius Caeser Play1486 Words   |  6 PagesWilliam Shakespeare’s famous play Julius Caesar utilizes the literary element of rhetoric multiple times throughout to show the true power that words can hold. The rhetoric in Caesar accompanies the play’s themes of betrayal, deception, and exaggeration. Brutus uses rhetoric to persuade the crowd of plebeians that the murdering of Caesar was positive and beneficial to all of Rome, winning their support and causing them to join his cause. Soon after, Mark Antony gives a terrifically-persuasive speechRead MoreJulius Caesar Power Of Speech921 Words   |  4 Pageshis play, Julius Caesar, in order to verify true the theme that loyalty and respect are two of the most extremely convincing tactics. He demonstrates the power of speech as he is manipulating words in order to prove a certain point in the speaker’s favor, whoever that may be. Mark Antony was a man who enjoyed spending the majority of his time at extravagant parties and receiving everything he wanted at his sudden demand. Shakespeare created Antony to be an expert in speech manipulation, which endedRead MoreShakespeare Was A Playwright That Emphasized Tragedy, Love1875 Words   |  8 PagesShakespeare’s ‘Julius Caesar’ with conflict experienced by Brutus between the high morality of the Superego, and the instinctual evil of the Id while the Ego tries to keep both levels of personality within an appropriate balance to avoid a discord in personality.  Ã‚  Another very powerful theory of Freud’s was the battle between life and death instincts which is unequivocally at the very basis of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar. The use of Freud’s theories can be found throughout the play Julius Caesar withRead MoreEssay on Shakespeare: A Master of Tragedy, As Seen in Julius Caesar1400 Words   |  6 Pagesperfect example being his infamous play Julius Caesar. Jealousy, power and war, all of which being huge bullets in the plot of the play. What to say it’s main scheme of it would have to be the conspiracy to murder the Caesar, and the conspirators that helped complete this bloody task. To do so, there were many events that led up to it, thus including the subplot. What this would’ve been most likely was Brutus’ self-struggles and inner conflicts. Julius, was defiantly not the smartest card inRead MoreJulius Caesar, by William Shakespeare and The Life of Caesar, by Plutarch882 Words   |  4 Pagesit is impossible to avoid all sources such as documents, leaders and friends. Manipulation, the ability to alter the position or influence a person, occurs everywhere one goes. Th roughout Julius Caesar by Shakespeare and The Life of Caesar by Plutarch, the theme of manipulation was revealed through countless instances showing both its sources and effects. Several of the characters in both accounts, such as Brutus, Caesar, and the people of Rome, were manipulated one time or another, by sources suchRead MoreJulius Caesar - Theme of Friendship951 Words   |  4 Pageshad sealed the fate of Julius Caesar, and Brutus, Cassius, and all the other conspirators knew that they could use this to their advantage, and to Caesars disadvantage. Friendship, was what the conspirators used as a cover to blind Caesar from the truth, just as a hunter uses camouflage to keep the animals from seeing what he is up to. The conspirators also used camouflage, but they used flattery along with manipulation as a way to soothe any feelings of doubt that Caesar may have had about theirRead MoreWilliam Shakespeare s Julius Caesar Essay2387 Words   |  10 PagesWilliam Shakespeare†™s Julius Caesar, the battle for power is always in a state of flux, constantly changing hands. Though the players in this play sometimes use physical force to obtain power, it is persuasion and manipulation that have the strong hold on her. Through close examination of this text, the use of persuasion and manipulation in obtaining and maintaining power will be explored. When the play first opens there is a celebration in the streets because Julius Caesar has proven victoriousRead More Motivation and Manipulation in Julius Caesar Essay1845 Words   |  8 Pages In Julius Caesar, Shakespeare illuminates the themes of human motivation and manipulation. He examines the relationship between actions and motivations, cause and effect, and word and deed, using the symbols of hands and hearts. Throughout the play, the characters Brutus and Marc Antony express their different understandings of this relationship rhetorically. In his 1953 film interpretation, Joseph L. Mankiewicz demonstrates these characters’ understanding through both the play’s original dialogueRead MoreThe Unexpected Surprise of Violence1009 Words   |  5 Pagesvalued once risks are taken, but the outcome is never expected. Shirley Jackson, reader of witchcraft books, horrifies people with her perspective on the understanding of merciless rituals that kept communities at ease. Shirley Jackson develops her theme of unexpected violence in her short story â€Å"The Lottery† through the use of irony, symbolism, and denouement. On a summer day in a small town in the short story, â€Å"The Lottery†, Jackson takes advantage of the peaceful environment and adds a convoluted

The Ganges River - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 3 Words: 1012 Downloads: 9 Date added: 2019/04/12 Category Society Essay Level High school Tags: Gang Violence Essay Did you like this example? The Ganges River: See, Judge, Act Using the Catholic Social Teaching Method See the Ganges River: The Ganges River is approximately 1,560 miles long and is located in in India and Bangladesh. Much of the water comes from China, Tibet and Myanmar. The river is located in a large plain which includes a lot of fertile farming area.. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "The Ganges River" essay for you Create order It is important to the hundreds of millions of people who live along its banks as a water source and for transportation, power, and food. Over four hundred million people use the river as a source for water, cooking and bathing. The river is used as a source of water for irrigation systems for their crops. It also provides water for drinking and bathing. The river supports a great number of fish species which serve as a food source for the growing population. Since the river is not too deep, it is used for transportation and moving goods with the use of flat bottom boats, small sail boats and steamer ships. It is like a highway of water for trade and people. Both India and Nepal draw hydroelectric power from the river and its tributaries. These power plants have also contributed to negative environmental impacts on animals, plants and have even forced some people to relocate. It flows from the Himalayas at about thirty miles in altitude into the Bay of Bengal. The river also flows through Bangladesh a large populated city. While the region used to be rich in forest and wildlife, it is now mostly agricultural farm land which supports the people who live along the river. Over the years, the population in the river basin has been diverse, including different ethnic, cultural, and religious groups. However, the Hindu faith has considered the river central to their faith and religious practice for centuries. It is probably one of the most revered rivers by any religion in the world. Cattle are often given free use of the river and since they are also considered a religious symbol, they are protected and allowed to roam free including eating garbage from the river. Ganges or Ganga in Hindi is important to the Hindu religion. Hindus believe the river personifies the goddess Ganga and when you bathe in the river, your sins are gone and you can be released from the cycle of life. So many followers bathe in the river. They also are buried in the river. Judge the Ganges: With the hundreds of millions of people living along the river, the pollution of the river is a major issue. Many cities pump untreated sewer into the river. Many people and cities dump raw garbage into the river hoping it will carry it away from them. With all of the farms, runoff that includes pesticides also contributes to the pollution and can affect humans and animals that use the river for drinking water or bathing. The pollution affects the plant life in and around the river. It can generate many bacteria which can make people and animals sick. The Hindu faith believes all living things are part of God and should be revere. They revere the Ganges. But how will the Ganges continue to live if everyone keeps allowing it to be polluted? Pope Francis in Laudato Si speaks about the interconnectedness of all humanity with respect to the environment (Francis, 2015). The Hindus cannot prevent the continued pollution of the river on their own. They have to get all of the people, regardless of being different religions to work together to protect the river and clean it up. Using the theory of Praxis, the followers of Hindu as well as other religions who also believe that taking care of the planet is important to their faith, need to work together to turn their ethical beliefs based on their faith into a plan of action to clean up and protect the Ganges. In the Catholic faith, Jesus would and Pope Francis would say that we should all work together to stop the pollution clean and protect the river. All life is sacred and the Catholic faith teaches that we have to take care of the planet as good stewards. We must protect the life that lives in and along the river. This includes fish, animals, plants and people. As importantly, each of us must learn about the other faith so that we can work together in a way that is not offensive, but instead look for common beliefs and values from which to take action. Pope Benedict and Pope Francis have taught that the environment belongs to all of us as it does not have any borders. Just as the Ganges flows across countries and borders, the air we breathe blows around the planet. We must be work together to solve the pollution problems and it is our responsibility to take care of pollution where ever it is as eventually, it will affect all of Gods creatures. We have an obligation to prevent that from happening. So many religions, Islam, Judaism and other believe the environment should be protected based on the tenets of their faith. The Indian government has tried many approaches to clean up the Ganges. They created various agencies and groups, but nothing has worked. Maybe the solution lies in our common faith based values and ethics. The Indian government could make the cleaning up and protection of the Ganges an exercise of faith. All of the other faiths would have to take the time to understand the Hindu faiths reverence for the Ganges, and ensure they approach the problem with the sensitivity needed to be respectful of their beliefs. But this would be a great time for the different religions to come to some understanding and work together on a real world problem, and actually solve the problem. In this way, we all put our faith into practice in real world experience and make our planet that we all must share better for all of us. We can then take this model of cooperation and use it in other places on the planet.