Domestic Terrorism In The United States Essay Example for Free

Domestic Terrorism In The United States Essay To varying degrees, domestic terrorism has survived and affected the social and political structure of the United States. As defined by the country’s Department of Justice, these words connote â€Å"the unlawful use of force or violence, committed by a group(s) of two or more individuals, against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives† (U. S. Department of Justice, 1994, p. 26). Though such characterization is considerably clear in its meaning, oftentimes a case-by-case interpretation is necessary to ascertain where extremism ends and terrorism begins. Terrorism vs. Extremism A more concise demarcation between extremism and terrorism is evident in the recognition that extremism is not unusual in any political environment, and is more often than not directed by societal pressures, civil discourse, education and the law. On the other hand, in terrorism, the violence is far beyond control by civil, educational or societal elements and must be tracked down, penalized and castigated by law enforcement agencies. The Dictionary of Political Thought defines extremism as â€Å"a vague term, that can mean a) the taking of a political idea to its limits, regardless of unfortunate repercussions, impracticalities, arguments and feelings to the contrary and with the intention not only to confront but also to eliminate opposition; b) intolerance towards all views other than one’s own; and c) the adoption of means to political ends which show disregard for the life, liberty and human rights of others† (Scronton, 1982). The complexity of separating terrorism and extremism is that in various situations, domestic groups which are seemingly law-abiding at present, may be contemplating of violent actions in the future. As it is, many violent groups started as non-violent discussion or protest movements with very lofty ideals; however, as time elapsed they evolved into something else. Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations, provides a suitable and a more fitting characterization of terrorism when he described it as â€Å"the deliberate and systematic murder, maiming and menacing of the innocent to inspire fear for political ends. † USA Patriot Act Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act stretched the definition of terrorism to include domestic in contrast to international terrorism. An individual is said to be involved in domestic terrorism if he/she does an act that is dangerous to human life, that is a violation of the criminal laws of a state or the United States, and if the act appears to be intended to a) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; b) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or c) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping. Further, the acts have to take place chiefly within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States and if they do not, then these acts can already be regarded as international terrorism. Clearly, Section 802 does not create a new crime of domestic terrorism. Nonetheless, it does extend the kinds or the nature of actions that the government can examine and probe into when it is investigating terrorism. The USA Patriot Act stretched out the powers of the government when they do their investigations and some of these powers are applicable to domestic terrorism. Such definition of domestic terrorism is expansive enough to cover the actions and activities of many known activist campaigns and organizations. Greenpeace, Operation Rescue, Vieques Island and WTO protesters and the Environmental Liberation Front have all recently engaged in activities that could make them subject to investigations as engaging in domestic terrorism. Contemporary Domestic Terrorism Though governments, private and public institutions have been beleaguered and weighed down by terrorism for hundreds of years in one form or another, the strategies and the application associated with it have changed and progressed as surely as the societies upon which it is imposed. Technological advances in the transportation, communication and in the area of weaponry have permitted the capacities of current domestic terrorist groups to get their message out and have enhanced their ability to take aggressive and sadistic action to achieve their objectives. President Clinton launched a counter-terrorism bill to the Senate and House of Representatives in February of 1995. One exceedingly contentious proposal in the bill is the assigning of the Department of Defense a dominant role in assisting the investigation of domestic terrorism incidents in which chemical and biological agents are utilized. Currently, the military can be used in cases of terrorist activities where there is an alleged employment of nuclear weapons or devices and much more if such allegation has been established (Hall, 1995, Sec A). Though the amplified role of the military would be limited, necessitating a further amendment to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, civil liberties experts cautioned that it would infringe the tenets of civil supremacy over the military and would only rekindle the hostilities and anti-government sentiments of the citizen-militias and conspiracy theorists (Landay, 1995). Furthermore, several Congressmen, law-enforcement officials and some military advisers concur that such employment of the military would be an exceedingly precarious approach in combating domestic terrorism. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a Democrat from New York, responded to questions as to whether the use of the military, in an expanded role, should be a part of the counterterrorism package, said, â€Å". . . the military defends the nation and does not involve itself in internal affairs† (Minzesheimer, 1995, Sec A). Incidents and Implications There has been an evident and persistent decline in the number of terrorist incidents in the United States during the past twenty years. To further delineate the trend of decline over time, a comparison of the average number of incidents per year during each of three, six-year periods would be useful. During the six year period from 1977 through 1982, there was an average of 59. 0 incidents/year; from 1983 through 1988 an average of 15. 7 incidents/year were recorded; this compared to an average of 5. 3 incidents/year investigated during the period from 1989 through 1994 (FBI, 1994). *** ACTIVE GROUPS OPERATING WITHIN THE UNITED STATES CLASSIFIED AS TERRORISTS African National Prison Organization (ANPO). An arm of the African Peoples Socialist Party. Animal Rights. Principally against use of animals for any purpose beyond their natural existence. Armed Resistance Group (ARG) aka Revolutionary Fighting Group, Red Guerrilla Faction. This group has been characterized in 1988 as tired and aging revolutionaries. Greenpeace Principally environmental-use extremists. Ku Klux Klan (KKK). Reorganized and relocated several arms of its group in 1989. Macheteros. Puerto Rican nationalists. Ohio Seven. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). Very public-relations oriented. Radical Feminist Organizing Committee (RFOC). Driven-out of the feminist movement in 1989, operating independently. RAMBOC (Restore a More Benevolent Order Coalition). Targets and actively pursues the US assets and people of foreign groups with terrorist links, such as the PLO, SWAPO, ANC, etc Rolling Thunder aka American Foundation for Accountability; primary focus is to draw attention to the POW/MIA issue from Vietnam War. Satanic Cult. Associated with attempted bombing of churches and kidnapping, and animal sacrifices, tombstone vandalism, and miscellaneous actions. Skinheads (SKA). Groups consist of both racist and anti-racist factions. SS Action Group. Principally anti-Semitic. Apparent Motivation There are principally four classifications into which groups that are regarded as domestic terrorists can be distinguished currently existing in the United States. These groups can be generically delineated as being either motivated by religious convictions, racial prejudice and supremacist goals, anarchistic/anti-government/politically motivated, or in pursuit of unique special interests. These classifications have been extracted from a collection of the categorization and delineation of extremist and terrorist groups by two respected subject-authorities, Stephen Segaller and FBI’s Department of Justice. Segaller, in his book Invisible Armies, classified domestic terrorism in the United States into four groups as well, but lists them as being: a) Cuban infighting (political), b) â€Å"backwoods terrorism† (a combination of religious, racist and anarchistic), c) violent Puerto Rican independence groups (political), and d) a handful of domestic revolutionary Marxist groups (anarchistic/anti-government and racist) (Segaller, 1987, pp. 221-225). Theoretically speaking, the stimulus for the creation and sustained existence of extremist and terrorist groups can unequivocally be associated in many circumstances to ethnic, cultural, religious, and racial feelings of superiority. An accurate depiction of the continuum formed by these supremacist attitudes, and how they promote further tension is succinctly articulated by Frank G. McGuire, when he said that as long as Christians feel superior to Jews (or vice-versa) and Catholics feel superior to Protestants and Ashkenazic Jews feel superior to Sephardic Jews, men feel superior to women and whites feel superior to blacks/browns/yellows/reds and so on, such phenomenon will be with us (McGuire, 1990, p. 10). These cultural, racial, gender, and a myriad of other differences that are present among people in society, particularly one as diverse as the United States of America, must be acknowledged and respected, but shouldn’t be seen or considered as a encumbrance to peace and harmony within society. Nor should these diversities be seen as wholly benign in their impact on the functioning of society as a whole. Tibor Machan, a social and political commentator, showed a well-timed dissertation on the myths and erroneous beliefs associated with viewing multiculturalism as simply a difference in dress, music, dance, and customs. Dr. Machan asserted that cultural differences, whether a result of race, gender, religion, or whatever, impacts both negatively and positively on other cultures within the society (Machan, 1996, pp. 134-135) and further opined that attitudes of cultural-superiority and intolerance are directly related and incorporated into many of the extremist views and motivations that are plaguing America today. The period from 1982 through 1994 showed that the targets of domestic terrorism were predominately commercial establishments. The majority of incidents directed against commercial establishments were conducted by animal-rights and/or anti-abortion extremists, either attacking stores that sold fur, or clinics that performed abortions or provided abortion advice, respectively (FBI, 1994; McGuire, 1990). Religious Racial Supremacy/Intolerance Religious intolerance founded upon fundamentalist standpoints has been the stimulus for acts of terrorism all throughout history and such as involved Orthodox Jews, Moslems, Catholics, and Protestants. Perhaps, there is no issue or idea among human beings that is as provocative and as seditious as that of religious beliefs. Auspiciously, at least as far as the United States is concerned, terror stimulated by religious intolerance has not been as significant a threat as in other parts of the world like in Africa, the Middle East or Bosnia. â€Å"America is a unique nation in that it guarantees the freedom of religion with the First Amendment and the right to [keep and] bear arms with the Second Amendment. This means that people can believe whatever they want, and they can buy the guns to protect that belief† (LeBaron, n. d). The statement was made in direct reference to Mormon fundamentalism and summarizes the very ideology upon which this country was founded which also provides an insight into the potential dangers that exist with religious extremist groups. Recently however, there has been rhetoric and open threats of aggression from different extremist groups that describe themselves as being inspired by religion, nonetheless, have undisputedly displayed racial supremacist and hate-mongering views. The leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, advocates sundry rhetoric of black supremacist views and religious fervor. He professes to have the faith and devotion of some four million people (Fletcher, 1996). In addition, several white-supremacist clusters, including some of the many Christian militia splinter groups, advocate exceptionally caustic and hate-filled threats as well, apparently an endless, ages-old game of â€Å"I call you a name, you call me a name. † Oddly enough, two racial supremacist groups representing opposite extremes, the Nation of Islam and the Posse Comitatus, have concurred to an ultimate end-state segregation of the United States into regions of pure racial integrity. Another group operating within the United States that has historically merged a racist agenda with religious rhetoric, and was truly very sadistic in its actions and objectives, is the Ku Klux Klan. They have, however, considerably lessened in both their membership numbers and invisible power-base in recent years, and though there are still very strident individuals appearing from time to time, the danger posed by the Klan nowadays is essentially restricted to local regions, and their activities are in the form of parades and rallies. As the Klan has faded in its activities and numbers, it has been replaced by the tremendously vicious and rapidly growing racist movement known as the Aryan Nations, which is strongly associated with the Identity Church that proclaims Anglo-Saxons as Gods chosen people. The fundamentalist Mormons are another religiously-motivated cluster within the United States that are catching the attention and concern of law enforcement and other government officials. This group has been at odds, to a certain degree, with the government since its creation in the early 1800s. Many of these fundamentalist Mormons are well-armed conspiracy-minded survivalists, who have retreated to the mountains of central Utah to await Armageddon, which they believe will occur on April 6, 2000. Believing in their gifts of prophecy and revelation, and fired-up by heavenly visions and doctrines of blood atonement and oaths of vengeance, they have isolated themselves awaiting the end of the world and fearing that the government is about to take away their freedoms (LeBaron, n. d. ). A specifically insightful yet explosive issue to a huge section of the American people, despite individual beliefs, is the classification of particular abortion clinic-related hostility as domestic terrorism. The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act of 1994 in concurrence with the Attorney General Guidelines (AGG) on General Crimes, Racketeering Enterprise and Domestic Security/Terrorism Investigations, instigated and directed the creation of the Department of Justice Task Force on Violence Against Abortion Providers to look into conspiratorial acts of violence against abortion clinics and personnel as domestic terrorism (FBI, 1994). Although personal opinions on the ethical aspects associated with abortion, whether for or against, are not wholly confined to religious beliefs, the most articulate, open and visible anti-abortion advocates are directly allied with religious organizations. As it is, abortion rights and issues persist to be one of the most contentious and conflict-ridden questions among Americans and motivate exceedingly passionate and rousing rhetoric and reactions from people from both sides of the matter. In the period between 1982 and the end of 1984, there were a total of 220 separate acts of violence, including 89 cases of bombing, arson and other serious incidents, conducted against clinics where abortions were performed or abortion-advice offered (Segaller, 1987, pp. 222-223). Ethnically and racially stimulated bias, extreme loathing and carnage are as much a part of human history as any other characteristics of mankind, and have at least to some extent have a bearing on the cultural and social identities of essentially all civilizations to date. From the subjugation of Hebrews by ancient Egyptians, to present-day current situation in the Balkans, racial and ethnic differences have triggered incalculable suffering and death. The history of racial and ethnic turmoil in the United States is no different, and is seemingly experiencing an increase in such activity recently. Racially-motivated extremist and terrorist groups in the United States, especially those of today, seem to employ religious rationalizations and teachings for their sadistic tendencies and aggressive actions, and all indications point to the fact that such trend will continue at an accelerating rate into the foreseeable future. Anarchistic/Anti-government /Political Terrorist clusters of today that are actually anarchist, anti-government or political in their motivations are mostly associated with the growing self-determination, radical citizen-militia movements, or have been around a relatively long time, such as the Puerto Rican freedom fighters. The former has drawn considerable attention, and extracted wary concern from law-enforcement and civil-rights groups due to the bombing in Oklahoma City, and their rapid and continuing growth in numbers and visibility. A few of the more extreme citizen-militia groups, often motivated by New World Order conspiracy theorists and anger over a belief that government has become too large and repressive in everyday life, are openly soliciting and calling for the overthrow of the United States government. These groups, when linked with the self-described â€Å"Constitutionalists,† are being considered as extremely dangerous by many law-enforcement and watchdog groups (Knickerbocker, 1995). The Puerto Rican terrorist groups have been almost exclusively limited in their actions to operating within Puerto Rico against local and federal targets of opportunity. Unique Special Interests Within this designation of domestic terrorist groups are those of relatively recent creation, or at least they have relatively recently gained high public visibility through their actions. Groups such as the extremist animal-rights groups, environmental extremist groups and homosexual-rights groups, including People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), Earth Night Action Group, and Act Up, respectively, have emerged within the past two decades and have actively used violence, destruction and intimidation to gain recognition, and to further their respective political agendas. References *** McGuire, Frank. 1990. Security intelligence sourcebook: Whos Who in terrorism. Silver Spring, MD. : Interests, Ltd. U. S. Department of Justice. 1994. Terrorism in the United States, 1994. Washington, DC. : National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Terrorist Research and Analytical Center Scronton, R. 1982. Dictionary of Political Thought. New York: Hill and Wang Hall, M. 1995. â€Å"Clintons Military Police Plan Under Fire. † USA Today, 11 May Sec. 5A. Landay, J. S. 1995. â€Å"Tempering Terrorism. † The Christian Science Monitor, 8 May Sec. US. Minzesheimer, B. 1995. â€Å"Terrorism Bill Warning: Go Slow. † USA Today, 1 May Sec. 5A. Federal Bureau of Investigation. 1994. Terrorism in the United States 1982 – 1992; Terrorism in the United States 1994. Segaller, S. 1987. Invisible armies, terrorism into the 1990s. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Machan, T. 1996. â€Å"Fallacies of Uncritical Multiculturalism. † The Freeman, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 134-135. LeBaron, G. Jr. â€Å"Mormon Fundamentalism and Violence: A Historical Analysis available at http://www. tcd. net/~garn/ polygamy. html. Fletcher, M. A. 1996. â€Å"Farrakhan Vows to Take Libyas Aid. † Washington Post, 26 February, Sec. A1. Knickerbocker, B. 1995. â€Å"US Militias: The Dark Side of Frontier Independence. † The Christian Science Monitor, 24 April, Sec. NATIONAL.

Mary Shelleys Frankenstein as a Portrait of Evil Essay -- Frankenstei

Frankenstein as a Portrait of Evil   Ã‚  Ã‚   Mary Shelley's Frankenstein is more than just a story of a creation gone bad; it is rather a story of evil that compares Victor Frankenstein to Prometheus and his monster as a God-like figure. Mary was able to do this by all of the influences that she had. These influences made her able to write a new, "modern", Prometheus that did not directly call upon God, but, however, it did directly call on evil.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The influences that Mary Shelley had were enormous. They were her husband, her parents, her friends, and her mind. Her husband, Percy Shelley, was also a great writer. To her he personified the genius and dedication to human betterment that she had admired her whole life (G.E.W.). And it was probably for this reason why Mary let him watch so closely over her while she wrote Frankenstein (Levine, 4) and why she gave him carte blanche to revise the book (5).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Her parents were also a big influence on her. Her father was William Godwin and her mother was Mary Wollstonecraft. William Godwin was a philosopher and a novelist. Mary Wollstonecraft was a feminist. From an early age she was subjected to famous philosophers, poets, and writers. She was always treated as if she was a unique individual and her parents put high expectations on her and her potential (G.E.W.). Because of all this she had a lot of her mother's and father's political ideas go   into her book (Levine, xiii).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   It was probably because of her friends that she wrote Frankenstein. They were all at a party at Lord Byron's villa when the played the famous game that motivated her to write Frankenstein (Patterson). Supposedly she was the only one that took the game seriously (Levine, xi... ...eing an excellent example of the portrayal of evil writing that is often found in the writing of the Romantic Period in Europe.    Works Cited and Consulted Bloom, Harold. Mary Shelly's Frankenstein. New York: Chelsea, 1987. G.E.W. Biographical Sketch.   Ã‚   Http://www.cc.columbia.edu/acis/bartleby/shelley/shel110.html Levine, George. The Endurance of Frankenstein. Los Angeles: Moers, 1974. Patterson, Arthur Paul. A Frankenstein Study. http://www.watershed.winnipeg.mb.ca/Frankenstein.html Smith, Christopher. Frankenstein as Prometheus. http://www.umich.edu/~umfandsf/class/sf/books/frank/papers/FrankCS.html Spark, Muriel. Mary Shelly. New York: Dutton, 1987. Spark and Stanford. My Best Mary. New York: Roy,1944. Williams, Bill. On Shelley's Use of Nature Imagery. http://www.umich.edu/~umfandsf/class/sf/books/frank/papers/FrankWJW.html

An Outline and Evaluation of Moral Development Through

An Outline and Evaluation of Moral Development through Piagets Theory and the Social Learning Theory Piaget (1932) developed a major theory based on children’s cognitive methodology when approaching particular moral situations; using the game of marbles and moral stories/dilemmas to evaluate the moral development a child. In his evaluation he categorised children into three stages of moral development i. e. pre-moral (0-5yrs), Moral Realism (5-8/9yrs), Moral Relativism (+9yrs).Concluding that children under five didn’t consider moral reasoning Piaget concentrated on the two latter stages. Piaget believed these stages are innate, they occur naturally; only through cognitive development will a child begin to move from moral realism to moral relativism. Moral realism is when a child has a heteronomous moral perspective with unilateral respect showing unconditional obedience to adults. They are egocentric and their moral judgement is based on consequences and intentions are not considered, with punishment being expiatory and usually unjustifiably severe.When a child reaches the stage of moral relativism, they have an autonomous moral viewpoint, they understand mutual respect and that rules are made through social agreement. They are able to recognise that there is a grey area between right and wrong and their moral decisions are based on intentions rather than consequences. Punishment is reciprocal i. e. shows balance between severity of the crime and the punishment received. He noted the importance of a child’s social environment and their interaction without an authority figure e. . in the school playground, here they learn to negotiate conflict and will start to understand resolution/compromise. According to Wright (1971) Piaget’s theory is supposed to show how a child’s practical moral development occurs but the evidence in fact was based on theoretical morality. Piaget linked this through the concept of conscious realization e. g. children can talk using the correct grammar long before they realize that there are rules that govern grammar.Implying that a child's practical morality shapes their theoretical morality; an adult’s moral influence won’t affect but will only help and guide a child’s theoretical morality catch up with their practical morality. Armsby (1971) suggests young children understand intention and show awareness to avoid damaging valued items, older children find it easier to differentiate the relation between intention and damage. Piaget’s stories confounds intentions and consequences, when approached separately Constanzo et al. 1973) confirmed that with adult disapproval six year olds judged on consequence regardless of intention but with adult approval they as with older children will consider intentions. Notably, social consequences are related to parental tendencies as children generally will have more experience in dealing with ill-intended acts. To sup port Piaget’s theory, Kruger (1992, cited in Gross, 1996) tested conflict resolution amongst children with and without an authoritarian figures involvement by giving them two moral dilemmas and questioning them afterwards.The children who had been paired with an adult had less real insight, lacking moral reasoning because they had given way to the adults understanding. When questioned afterwards, they had a less sophisticated stance-point than the children who had been paired together, showing the advantages attributable to egalitarian active discussion. As Piaget’s investigations were only based on a small amount of subjects, whereas Jose Linaza (1984) interviewed several hundred children in relation to a number of games; participants were from England and Spain, both boys and girls.He re-affirmed Piaget’s findings but found that depending on the games complexity this determined what age certain stages become more apparent, another notable finding was there was no difference between the English and the Spanish children. Turiel (1998) critic’s Piagets methods regarding the moral dilemma questions used as a child would find it difficult to be morally judgemental because of the drastic difference in consequence. i. e. fifteen cups versus one cup, thus tempting the child to ignore intention.Rule et el. (1974) shows that young children understand the difference in intention, particularly dependant on whether the act is pro-social or hostile i. e. if an aggressive act is in defence of another or not. Bandura, McDonald. (1963) doubted Piaget’s theory; in particular the concept of stages by explaining moral judgement through social learning theory, generally children imitated the models behaviour even if their reasoning differed.As social learning theory involves the key factors attention, retention, reproduction and motivation and children are said to be able to imitate others behaviour through observational learning, since moral b ehaviour can be observed and imitated there will be a definite link between SLT and moral development. Bandura et al(1961, cited in Haralambos & Rice, 2002) Bobo Dolls studies on SLT were criticised due to the artificial conditions i. e. he subjects were not geographically selected at random thus pre conditioning could have influenced results and because of the nature of the Bobo Dolls (they sprung back when struck) the children could then have perceived the aggression the models showed towards the dolls as a game. Therefore, the need to have an understanding for the aggression was lacking and since the children observed no vicarious punishment (verbal or physical) they would have no need to make a judgement, they didn’t have any reason to dissuade them from performing the behaviour.Interestingly, Langer (1975) replicating Banduras experiment concluded that his techniques confused the children. After viewing the model half of the children’s moral judgements remained th e same and when they did change their explanations didn’t. When a child is trying to form identification they will associate with and imitate/model themselves on other people’s behaviour/mannerisms. Though this is not confined necessarily and exclusively to parents as other family members, siblings in particular together with peers will play a significant part in a child’s behaviour.A child may imitate a complete stranger’s behaviour especially if vicarious reinforcement is shown as the child then has the motivation to imitate this particular behaviour. Children may imitate behaviour without the insight to make a moral judgement. Notably, Hoffman’s research observed that age dependant children are more likely to imitate a role models deviant behaviour rather than the models compliant behaviour, this emphasises a lack of moral development. (1970, cited in Bukatko & Daehler, 1998) Grusec et. l (1978) focused on whether or not a child would imitate a models good behaviour (donating/giving) with or without verbal instruction. What is shown in her results was that through observing, the majority of children, even without verbal instruction imitated the models behaviour. Nelson (1980) found that children as young as the age of three are able to make intentional based decisions regardless of consequence as long as information on intentions is made clear. Observational learning and principles of reinforcement can not adequately explain all aspects of moral development as a child’s cognitive processes are not fully explored.As explained by Turiel (1983) in this study, children who receive punishment too late for non-compliant behaviour seems to show a leniency towards deviant behaviour, the late timing mentioned only seems to confuse the children, once again showing a lack of understanding/judgement. Insightfully, the above-mentioned studies on moral development confirm clearly that children even from a very young age imitate o ther people’s behaviour and whether they understand the intentions or consequences of any particular behaviour is questionable especially at a young age.The concept of conscious realisation is a cognitive process which would only develop depending on the moral influences of a child’s socialization, emotional attachments, level of education and life experience. Bibliography Armsby, R. (1971) A re-examination of the development of moral judgements in children. Child Development, 42, 1242-1248 Bandura, A. & McDonald, F. J. (1963). Influence of social reinforcement and the behavior of models in shaping children's moral judgments. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(3),  274-281. Bukatko, D. & Daehler, M. W. (1998).Child Development: A Thematic Approach. New York; Houghton Mifflin. p. 410. Costanzo, P. , Coie, J. , Grumet, J. , & Farnill, D. (1973). A re-examination of the effects of intent and consequence on children's moral judgements. Child Development, 44(1) , 154-161. Gross, R. (1996) Psychology: The Science of Mind and Behaviour. London: Houghton & Stoughton. p. 696. Grusec, J. E. , Kuczynski, L. , Rushton, J. P. , & Simutis, Z. M. (1978). Modelling, direct instruction, and attributions: Effects on altruism. Developmental Psychology, 14, 51–57. Haralambos, M. A. & Rice, D. (ed) (2002).Psychology in Focus, Ormskirk; Causeway Press. p. 316-317. Langer, J. (1975). Disequilibrium as a source of development. In P. Mussen, J. Langer, & M. Covington (Eds. ), Trends and issues in developmental psychology (pp. 22-37). New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. Linaza, J. (1984). Piaget’s marbles: the study children’s games and their knowledge of rules. Oxford Review of Education, 10, 271-4. Nelson, S. A. (1980). Factors influencing young children's use of motives and outcomes as moral criteria. Child Development, 51, 823-829. Piaget, J. (1952), Moral Judgement of a Child, London : Routledge and K.Paul Rule, B. G. , Nesdale, A. R . , McAra, J. R. (1974) Children’s Reaction to the Information about the Intentions Underlying an Aggressive Act: Child Development, 45(3) pp 794-798 Turiel, E. (1983)  The Development of Social Knowledge: Morality and Convention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Turiel, E. (1998) Moral development, in: W. Damon (Ed. ),  Handbook of Child Psychology, 5th Edition, Volume 3: N. Eisenberg (Ed. ), Social, Emotional, and Personality Development, pp. 863-932 (New York: Wiley). Wright, D. (1971). The psychology of moral behavior. Middlesex, England: Penguin Books.

Political Philosophy Essays - 2485 Words

nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Every country in the world has a government that sets laws to keep order and peace. Not every government can be just in its ruling, but what defines a just ruling? And does anyone truly have the right to control others? Throughout time different types of governments have been established. As history progressed most governments were overthrown because of the laws that were imposed. Emperors and Kings changed to Presidents and Prime Ministers. This was caused by revolutions because the people did not like the way they were being ruled. But should people be ruled in the first place? Who should have the right to do such a thing? Today, the most powerful countries are run by democracy. But what is its purpose? It†¦show more content†¦Francois- Marie de Voltaire was born in Paris to a wealthy family in 1694. He lived during the time of the enlightenment, which was a period of new thinking using critical reason to free minds from prejudice and unexamined au thority. Later on in his life, Voltaire was a prisoner in the Bastille and then exiled to England because of a duel with Chevalier de Rohan, an Aristocrat who found Voltaire’s name insulting. Throughout his life he has written both plays and books such as Zaire, Treatise on Tolerance and Dictionnaire Philosophique (Gray, 13). nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Voltaire believes that Law is a rational guide in an irrational world. This means that the purpose of laws is to give the citizens a certain duty that must be fulfilled in order for society to function properly. If this is to successfully work through laws then everything else should run by laws including the Crown and Church that have very important duties. The entire state should be run on duties that everyone must fairly fulfill. Therefore the state exists for the citizen (Gray, 45). The duties are created to make things safer for the citizens. It is the obligation of the state to create these proper laws and give them to the people for their own good. The state is to provide for the citizen and not the other way around. This is why Voltaire says, â€Å" The character of liberty lies in independence,Show MoreRelatedPolitical Science And Political Philosophy Essay3559 Words   |  15 PagesIntroduction Political science is a an academic discipline. It is a part of social science which discuss about government and politics. It generally analyses the methods and policies of government. It is the systematic and analytical study of political and government institutions. The procedure and process of governmental policies is explained in political science. In order to define and analyze political science many political thinkers have given different theories. They practiced political scienceRead MorePolitical Philosophy Of Liberalism1098 Words   |  5 PagesLiberalism is a political viewpoint that is established on the thoughts of liberty and equality. Thus, liberalists promote various ideas that are aligned to the concepts of liberty and equality such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, gender equality, and civil rights. In general, it can be argued that the philosophy of liberalism is focused on protecting and promoting the freedom of the people (Celikates and Jansen). As such, it presents the people as the central issue of politics. In factRead MorePolitical Philosophy And American Political Thought981 Words   |  4 Pages I have applied to participate in the Hertog Summer Programs in Classical Political Philosophy and American Political Thought because of my passion for politics. This passion inspired me to become commit to the Major in Government at Georgetown University. A professor once gave me the following definition of politics as, â€Å"the resolution of conflict among the competing interests of individuals, groups, and or nations.† Therefore, the study of politics in my opinion is the study of how groups reachRead More Political Philosophy Essay1759 Words   |  8 PagesPolitical Philosophy Part One (Question 2) Aristotle, Locke, and Hobbes all place a great deal of importance on the state of nature and how it relates to the origin of political bodies. Each one, however, has a different conception of what a natural state is, and ultimately, this leads to a different conception of what a government should be, based on this natural state. Aristotle’s feelings on the natural state of man is much different than that of modern philosophers and leads to a constructionRead MoreMy Political Philosophy2204 Words   |  9 PagesMy Political Philosophy Political Philosophy is typically a study of a wide range of topics such as, justice, liberty, equality, rights, law, politics and the application of a codified law. Depending on what the philosophy is, it usually tends to be a very sensitive and a personal ideology that an individual holds within the reality of their existence. Several of the fundamental topics of political philosophy shape up the society that we live in as these specific topics and their implementationRead MoreThe Philosophy Of Political Science1799 Words   |  8 PagesOhlone College The philosopher, Thomas Hobbes, started out with the philosophy of political science while on his trips and visits neighboring countries outside of England to listen to other scientists discuss and learn about different forms of government. While studying, Thomas Hobbes wondered about why people allow themselves to become ruled by the government and would be the ideal form of government best for England. He answered that questioned by stating that since people wereRead MoreThe Machiavelli s Political Philosophy1575 Words   |  7 PagesMachiavelli’s Political Philosophy Precede It is fundamentally important to preface the discussion hosted in this essay by addressing ourselves to the most mundane question-why consider Machiavelli in the context of philosophy, least of all, political philosophy? This question dominates any philosophical inquiries of the Machiavelli’s political ideologies. Put differently, do the contributions by Niccolà ² Machiavelli to the various salient discourses in the Western thought, most notably political theoryRead MoreJohn Lockes Political Philosophy 752 Words   |  3 Pages John Locke is one of the most influential political philosophers of the modern era. He is a strong-minded empiricist whom expresses radical views about law and order. Locke is a fascinating figure in the history of law and order whose excellence of elucidation and depth of intellectual activity remains extremely influential. His mature political philosophy leant support to the British Whig party and its principles, to the Age of Enlightenment, and to the development of the separation of the StateRead MorePolitical Philosophy And The Natural Law856 Words   |  4 PagesPolitical philosophy and the natural law are seldom reflected on in politics. Typically, persons in a political or civil society are often distracted by fiscal success or recreational leisure. In society today, there exists a consensus reality with the prospect of money and power. This reality emanates from a scandalous and corrupted political system. As a result, there lacks the recognition of idealistic values on li beralism, human rights, and the natural law. There have been several philosophersRead MorePolitical Philosophy Is Not Just Applied Moral Philosophy Essay2560 Words   |  11 PagesIntroduction: Political philosophy is the study of basic questions about the state, government, politics, liberty, justice etc. political philosophy is concerned with the concepts and arguments involves in political opinion. It is ethics applied to a group of people, discusses about societies set up.In political philosophy it is important to know what ought to be a person’s relationship in a society. This seeks application of ethical concepts to social sphere. It is a standard which help to analyze