Production system optimization Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Production system optimization - Coursework Example The new Efficiency will be: Alternatively, we use the results of analysis which indicate that the more the number of LV Doors, the more the number of workstations required for production (Burke, 2005). It therefore means that the number of work stations needed in the assembly lines has to be reduced (Rutherford, 2002). The required minimum number of the workstations can be calculated as: This requires that we reduce the cycle times for every LD Door to obtain the smallest number of workstations required. In the original situation where there are 4 assembly doors, the number of workstations required is 15.10 which are rounded off to 16. However, the reduction of cycle times gives the calculation of the number of work stations as follows: As we maintain the minimum number of workstations at 14, we have balanced the line to its optimal efficiency (Chapman & King, 2008). This efficiency must be maximized since it corresponds to the percentage utilization of the workstations available. In the current situation, the production system produces about 3 sets of MC every day, when the operation runs continuously for 12 hours in a day (Brookhart, 2006). It means that the efficiency has to be increased until the production shifts from 3 to 5. This requires that we measure the percentage by which the production will have increased. This is calculated as

The Consequences of World War I Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

The Consequences of World War I - Essay Example Although that might not get you a very high grade on a history test, many modern scholars perceive WWII as a continuation of WWI, just after a short reprieve. The First World War is often remembered as one of the bloodiest of wars fought; bloodier than what was experienced during the American Civil War. In fact, it is fair to say that no one is Europe, Asia, and the United States, nor the rest of the world, believed that this war would be so destructive, caused so much death, or last so long (Keylor 1). The events of WWI and those that occurred directly after led to consequences that changed the societal structures, national economies, and, ultimately, led to the start of WWII 20 years later. History Prior to WWI the United States had not been involved in any wars since the turn of the century. Things in Europe were going quite differently. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, nephew of the Austrian Emperor, along with his wife while vacationing had outraged the Austrians. Serbia was held responsible. However, while waiting to be certain that they had the support and backing of Germany, gave the Serbians time to guarantee the backing and support of Russia. War was declared, approximately a month later, in July of 1914. The Central Powers included Germany, Austrio-Hungary, and Turkey opposing the Allies, which included Russia, France, Serbia, Great Britain, Japan, Belgium, and later the United States (Keylor 1). Trench warfare began. However, it was not long before troops and financing began to dwindle. It was not until 1917 that the United States entered and declared war on Germany. This was a direct reaction to the German’s sinking the British Ship the Lusitania, which killed a number of American passengers, and a telegram sent by Germany offering Untied States lands to Mexico if they would join them in opposing the United States. The war would rage throughout until 1919. In total, More than 9 million sailors, soldiers, and pilots were killed, 5 million civilians were caught in the crossfire of war, and then another 7 million men returned home injured and/or permanently disabled. There were also huge costs involved in the length of the world, billions of dollars spent across the 28 different countries (Mintz 1). Discussion The consequences of WWI saw the United States begin to rise as dominate economic and political power in the world, mostly because many of the nations of Europe were so depleted. For Europeans the consequences were quite harsh. The political, economic, and social orders of European society, in some cases, came â€Å"crashing down.† It saw the fall of the Ottoman Empire, Germany, Austrio-Hungary, and Russian empires (Keylor 1). New nations were emerging as borders began to change, ethnic tensions were heightening, and an inability to recover from the losses suffered due to the war. As a response many leaders sought to establish a â€Å"new international system† that would help repair damage in Europe and lead to a more productive future for all of the nations. Delegates from these nations met in Paris, France in 1919 to discuss the â€Å"Treaty of Versailles.† However, the major powers, in the treaty discussions were left to Britain, France, Italy, and the United States. It was during this time that the â€Å"league of Nations† was established which would ideally aid in preventing other armed warfare in the future. Although, Germany felt slighted by the treaty, but did not lose territory and therefore signed the treaty. Also, many felt that the Germans were responsible for the majority of WWI, and therefore cost them dearly. Ultimately, the United State

Philosophy of Man Essay Example for Free

Philosophy of Man Essay â€Å"Man† seems to have been quite a neglected subject in the history of Western philosophy; more attention has been paid to God and universe than to man. Though there are many reputable histories of the specific branches of philosophy; and even of some of its special subjects such as logic ethics, aesthetics, politics, law and history, a â€Å"history of the philosophy of man† has yet to be written and even vet to be conceived. True â€Å"man† has sometimes been discussed as a part of this or that theory or system in ethics, politics or education, but such subsidiary discussions by their very nature remain controlled by the requirements and presuppositions of a particular theory or system. All this strikes rather ironical in view of the fact that, to the great Socrates; first of the founders of Western philosophy, the central theme of philosophy was not the world, but man. Socrates’ deep concern for the well-being of man makes him look like a prophet moving amongst the Greeks. In the celebrated Platonic Dialogue; the Apology, Socrates is reported to have gone to God, only to be graced with a special message for his fellow men. This Divine message exhorted the Athenians to â€Å" take the greatest possible care of their souls and not to ruin their lives by letting the care of the body and of the â€Å"possessions† take precedence over the good of the soul. Nay, they must make their souls as good as possible, making them like God†. Socrates is, however, better known to us for his detailed and meticulous analyses of the moral qualities of man; such as justice, goodness, courage, temperance and so on. But what is more important for us to note here is the woeful fact that nowhere in ‘all the twenty-eight platonic Dialogues, we find Socrates giving as a definition of man. Perhaps even for Socrates, man was too much of a mystery, and a veritable riddle to be comprehended through a philosophical definition. Both Plato and Aristotle, after Socrates, ventured to give us definitions of man; but these definitions, with due deference to these two great masters, unfortunately, are no longer tenable on empirical grounds. Plato’s definition of man as a political animal, perhaps, reflects only the intensely political atmosphere of the city-states of his days. We in our own days know fully well that man in the pre-literate and primitive societies has neither state nor politics. Aristotle’s definition of man as a social animal, very sadly, casts a slur on his otherwise well-established reputation as â€Å"the founder of a systematic and comparative Zoology†. Sociability cannot be said to be the real hallmark of man to distinguish him from the animals. Some of the animals, at quite a lower rung of the evolutionary ladder, manifest as much sociability in their behaviour as man. The social insects like termites, ants, bees and wasps live in colonies and give clear evidence of group-integration and division of lab our; they have their kings and queens and workers and soldiers much as the human beings have. The definition of man as a rational animal not only carries the formidable authority of Aristotle but also the weight of a long tradition running throughout the ages. This definition of man, to my mind, is more prescriptive than descriptive. It exhorts man to think rationally rather than describe the fact of man’s actually thinking rationally. But it is an imperative or a command, and a good command indeed but for that very reason not a definition. It may be insisted that Aristotle, in his definition has made an empirical statement of the kind that man by virtue of the quality of rationality (differentia) inherent in him, always thinks rationally. In that case this definition is not satisfactory, because it is an incomplete definition which has taken â€Å"rationality† as the sole distinctive quality of man as it differentiates him from the animals. There are, however, other similar unique qualities of man differentiating him from the animals, which have been completely by-passed in Aristotles definitionqualities, for example, of artistic imagination and numinous sense of the presence of the Divine to all things. Aristotle’s- definition could give us only a fragmented man as if a featherless biped. Aristotle’s definition of man in terms of genus and differentia, Plato’s in terms of the tripartite division of the soul, and the great scholastic philosophers’ in terms of the indivisible soul-substance which does nothing to us nor we do anything to it; all of them seem to be some of the blind alleys in the history of philosophy. These definitions, however, are not altogether meaningless; in any case they are better than Cartesians’ definition of man as an assembled organic machine ready to run, or behaviourists’ definition of him as a toy in the Watsonian box mercilessly caught between the stimulii and the responses. Classical philosophers’ definitions or conceptions of man are to be construed not through the detailed analyses of their philosophical terms but through a close and deep understanding of their whole philosophical perspective. In case their definitions continue to remain unacceptable to us, even then we are to change not the definitions but the philosophical perspective from which these definitions have emerged. This is much like moving from the geocentric perspective to the heliocentric perspective in astronomy. But the change of a perspective in philosophy, as in other domains of human knowledge, usually entails a change in the methods of its study, like, for instance, studying the moon, through a telescope and studying it by landing on its surface, or more precisely, as Max Weber puts it, like studying the cultural phenomena through the usual methods of scientific explanation and studying them through the method of â€Å"interpretative understanding†. Quite a few new perspectives in philosophy and even the new methods of their study came to be keenly discussed and elaborated in some of the major universities in Germany such as Munich, Hamburg and Berlin, somewhere in the 1020’s. Some of these new perspectives or branches of philosophy and their methods may be roughly translated in English as: â€Å"Philosophy of Life†, â€Å"Study of the Human Sciences†, â€Å"Study of the Cultural Sciences†, â€Å"Method of Spiritual Interpretation†, Method of understanding (verstehn) in Human Sciences†, and â€Å"Method of Phenomenology†. From the very titles of.these new branches of philosophy, it becomes clear that they especially focus their attention on man. The method, that the proponents of the new sciences of philosophy employ in the study of man is a highly technical affair; broadly speaking, it may be characterized as an empirical method of the highest order. From the new undertakings and preoccupations of some of the distinguished German philosophers in the new philosophy, there emerged quite a few new disciplines such as a â€Å"Philosophy of Culture†, â€Å"Philosophy of Symbolism†, â€Å"Biographical Studies† and â€Å"Philosophy of the Human Sciences†. Among them was also the philosophy of man as a very specialized and independent discipline; named as Philosophical Anthropology or Anthropological Philosophy. By 1940 there were quite a few chairs for philosophy of man in some of, the renowned universities in Germany. After World War II interest in this discipline spread to Holland and France. Soon after it had its impact felt in the United States; possibly through the influence of the most distinguished German philosopher, Ernest Cassirer, who after having left Germany in 1933 had taught at Oxford and later chaired the Departments of Philosophy, at the universities of Yale and Columbia. He is perhaps the only German Philosopher to have been admitted to the distinction of the library of living philosophers. Without any pretentions to originality the philosophers of man have acknowledged their great indebtedness to many of the philosophers of the past; notably to Blaise Pascal, Goethe, Kant, Herder, Hegel, Kierkegaard, Feuerbach, Nietzsche. They have drawn their greatest inspiration, however, from the works of Wilhelm Dilthey (1833-1911); one of the greatest philosophers of history and culture. Dilthey is noted for his thoroughgoing empiricism and for the encyclopedic range of his academic interests. The most singular of his contributions to philosophy, however, is his construction of a new methodology for philosophy, and a Dew science of interpretation (Hermenutics) for the study of human sciences (Geisteswisseneschaften). He is reported to have worked on these major preoccupations of his for forty years. Dilthey’s works, prepared by a team of editors, have appeared in eighteen volumes with more to follow. A six-volume English translation of his selected works is being published by Princton University since 1984. Among the writers; specifically on the â€Å"philosophy of man† in Germany, by far the most active of its exponents, is Max Scheler whose work Man’s Place in Nature (Die Stellung des Mensehen in Kosmos. 1928) is perhaps the first ice-breaker. Scheler was also the first to employ an independent method of phenomenology to the study of religion. He, however, is better known in the Anglo-Saxon world for his pioneer work on Sociology of Knowledge, the great merit of which has been recognized by th Max Weber and Karl Mannheim. Ernest Cassirer, generally known to us for being one of the earliest writers on Einstein’s Theory of Relativity (1921), is in fact the most distinguished philosopher of symbolism. His very original theory of symbolism as exhibited variously in science, art, religion, myth and language, is elaborately expounded in his three-volume work: Philosophy of Symbolic Forms: (Philosophie der Symbolischen Formen, 1923-1929). This theory has given the new philosophy of man a firm empirical base; it has also given to it a definitive starting point. Man, according to Ernest Cassirer, is essentially a symbolizing animal. It is man’s unique ability to use symbols, or in the language of the Quran, the ability to name things that differentiates man from the pre-human animals. It is through this unique ability to use symbols that man learnt to assign to objects, persons and advents certain meanings such as could not at all be grasped through the sensations. So long as man did not become aware of symbols, he remained at a level of mental existence in which the world was dark and opaque and meant nothing. But the moment man started using symbols he was, as if through a magic wand, awakened to a new mode of consciousness; the consciousness of meanings. Man’s awareness of, so to say, capturing the things by assigning meanings to them through the use of symbols, lifted him literally to a new dimension of human existence. This exaltation of man to a new level of existence, verily because of his ability to use symbols; is referred to in the Quran i. e. verse: when Adam exhibited the ability to name things and this was beyond the angel’s spiritual dimensionangels prostrated themselves before him. It is interpreted sometimes to mean that it is verily through his ability to use words that man came to have a mysterious sway over everything that he touched or looked at. In the symbolic’ comprehension of meanings, the words dog, rat, rabbit, are not merely sounds but meaningful sounds. The meanings, however, are not inherent in the sounds (or in the shapes or the configurations of the letters in case of written words) as such, but are arbitrarily or conventionally assigned to them by human beings. The point to be noted here is that, in an articulate speech, the sensory sounds of the words have no intrinsic relations to the meanings intended by the speaker; sounds or patterns of sounds are used merely as symbolic instruments or vehicles for the meanings. This explains very largely that though the anthropoid apes, in the so-called great-ape-language-experiments, usually succeed in picking up short series of single words, they utterly fail to develop a sense of â€Å"contextual† relevance of words as also to acquire the ability to link the words syntactically or as the experimenters put it: â€Å"Apes are complete blank in grammar. † How and when did man learn to use symbols or words continues to remain an open question. Plato was perhaps the first to broach the subject of the origin of language in his Dialogue The Cratylos. His discussion of the matter, however, was inconclusive as also were the speculative theories of many classical philosophers who ventured into unravelling the mystery of language. Inquiries into the origin of language are now quite out of fashion with the modern philosophers and linguists. We must, however, note here  the position on this issue taken by Edward Burnett Tylor. He was, admittedly, one of the most distinguished of the British anthropologists. He tells us that â€Å"at some point in the evolution of primates, a threshold was reached in some line, or lines, when the ability to use symbols was suddenly realized and made explicit in overt behaviour. There is no intermediate stage, logical or neurological, between symbol ling and non-symbolling: an individual or a species is either capable of symbolling or he or it is not. â€Å" All that Tylor means to tell us here is that the ability to use symbols emerged through a kind of mysterious leap and is not the product of gradual and continuous process of evolution. This is clearly indicated by the, expression â€Å"suddenly realized† in the above passage. Instead of openly confessing his ignorance on the issue of the origin of symbolling, i. e. , language, Tylor seems here to cloak this ignorance by using the doubtful and debatable doctrine of leaps or jumps so popular with the Emergent and Creative Evolutionists. If both philosophy and science fail us in this matter, why not then accept the view given in the Scriptures that man learnt the names of things from God Himself and call it the divine theory of language. Even as scientists we are not to say that there are only perceptual symbols and completely ignore a whole class of symbols called the religious symbols. The religious symbols constitute a peculiar language of their own which is quite as meaningful as scientific language; only like the language of art, it has its own unique method of interpretation or in Dilthey’s words a unique Hermenutics. Having acquired the capacity to use symbols a bit more freely and having built up a sizable working lexicon of these symbols, man started his journey away from the physical world (merely a sensory world of the animals), created by the Lord, to a non-physical world, created by man himself as the Deputy of the Lord. Very briefly this new world of the Deputy is the world of, meanings and values; giving a broad classificatory description of it, it is the world of language, myth, art, religion, philosophy, and science. It is however more convenient to call it the world of culture. It is to be noted here that animals cannot possibly be admitted to man’s world of culture as earlier they could not be admitted to man’s world of symbols. Culture and symbols indeed are like soul and body to each other. Hence it would not be inappropriate to say that culture, born of the inmost passions of man’s psyche or spirit (Geist), always manifests itself in and through the dress of symbols. Much more important, however, is the fact that it is only through its symbolic dress that culture receives a tangible form so that it can be safely stored in libraries, galleries, museums, and places of worship. Soon, culture assumes a personality of its own, independent of man, its creator. It then begins to move from generation to generation, and from epoch to epoch and manages to stalk in man’s history as a power by itself. Culture thus comes to change its position with man and claims to be creator of man. The way culture is transmitted from one generation to another is the most wondrous of all the cultural phenomena. Nietzsche observed in his usual inclisive way that culture could be possessed by man alone for man alone is born as an unfinished animal. The human infant as compared to the infants of other animals is biologically much less formed as if it were born premature and certainly it is too much of a weakling to face the slightest blows of nature. Moreover this creature has to go a long way before it can lay claims to be on its own if ever it would! On the other hand the parents of this weakling are irresistibly attracted to it and extend to it the most affectionate care and love. The weakling’s helplessness for a long stretched period of its infancy and the corresponding intense attachment of the parents (particularly of the mother) are some of the important constituents of a new phase of the human weakling’s life. This phase has been termed as the second gestation or the extra-uterine gestation. It seems as if the infant at the time of its birth was released from the biological confines of the mother only to be thrown into the socio-cultural confines of the world. It has sometimes been said that most human animals move from the confines of one shell into those of another and never really are born, unless, of course, if they are helped through some kind of cultural maiuetics or spiritual midwifery. It is a well-known fact that a child learns his native language in the shortest possible span of time. By the age of six and even five most children would have learnt not only more than 90% of the basic vocabulary of their language but also its grammar, the correct form of its a lot of idioms, the right pronunciation, the proper accent or intonation, the appropriate choice of words to be addressed variously to parents, a sibling, a playmate, or a servant. This is amazing! How does the child learn all this? ‘I he simple and perhaps correct answer is: The child learns all this through its skin. The child starts being sensitized right from the early days of its birth by a deeply emotionalized inter-personal involvement with a number of persons around it. The most important of these persons, of course, is the mother who starts teaching the child a new scheme of conditioned reflexes, soon to be developed into an elaborate system of symbols, not merely through the words of mouth but also through the soft and warm touches of her body, her hugs, her fondlings, her caresses, and her one and hundred kisses. The language as if it were, was being injected into the child. As the child grows up through boyhood and adolescence right into adulthood this language stays with him and becomes the veritable part of his personality. It would not be for wrong to assert that the child gets enclosed for ever within the shell of its native language which it cannot possibly break through unless it chances to be a Ghalib or an Iqbal. It is exceedingly important to note here that the child imbibes its native culture through the same emotionally sensitized, subjectivized, internalized way as becomes available to it in learning the native language. Culture and language (scheme of symbols) are so closely tied to each other that it is well-nigh impossible to imagine a culture without its peculiar language; nor is it possible to think of a language without its culture. To have a language without a culture is tantamount to having words without meanings, which makes no sense. Thus child’s learning its native culture, and its learning the native language are not two processes but one in which the two are interwined with each other for their very existence. Some leading modern psychologists, however, are of the view that the child learns the whole value and belief-system embodied in its culture much quicker than he learns the language. The process of imbibing the culture they hold is comparatively more sensitized, more subjectivized and more internalized; than that learning the language. Language on the other hand, is a bit more of a cognitive and schematic affair. Language further has more of an instrumental value to serve as a symbolic medium, while culture carries all the intrinsic meanings and values which are closest to the child’s heart. The child internalizes all the cultural meanings and values of his milieu and they become real powerful ingredients of his personality. In other words the child gets snugly enclosed in a fully fortified, double-walled shell of language and culture for the rest of his life. The notion of the second, i. e. , the socio-cultural gestation of man is, thus, not to be labelled a mere speculation of the philosophical anthropologists but a doctrine well-rooted in the empirically grounded evidence. The above process of acculturation through which every human child has to pass has led some American psychologist, notably Benedict Ruth and Margaret Mead, to advance their doctrine of cultural determinism. According to this doctrine, even though individuals think that they make personal choices, at least, in such trivial matters as buying an article of clothing or eating or not eating a particular food in the restaurant, their choices are, in fact, fully determined by the socio-cultural milieu in which they have . been brought up. However bleak, gloomy or disheartening by this view of stark determinism might be, It is not easy to refute it. It carries weight in so far as it explains some important socio-cultural phenomena. Take, for instance, the strifes and conflicts between socio-cultural groups, small or big, belonging to this or that piece ,of land, in the south or the north, in the east or the west, subscribing to this or that religious view or ideological shiboleths. These social psychologists and culturologists tell us, are very largely due to the fact that the socio-political behaviour of the individuals and more particularly of their leaders is dertermined in the final analysis by the forces residing within their respective socio-cultural shells. Cultural determinism as viewed by Ruth and Mead and even as conceived earlier by the behaviourists, the psycho-analysts and the historical materialists poses a real serious challenge to any philosophy of man. Philosophers like Dilthey and Scheler, however, insist that the solution to this apparently impossible problem is not theoretical but entirely practical and experiential. Culture, according to them, owes its origin, essentially to the extraordinary experiences and arduous creative work of the great prophets, the great artists, and the great philosophers and other great geniuses who have given new meanings and new dimensions to human life. These torch-bearers of life cannot be said to be passive product of socio-cultural forces of their milieu. The very fact that they have the capacity to take these socio-cultural forces into their own hand and direct them into new channels in the light of their Geist falsifies any such view. Dilthey, however, goes farther and urges us to absorb and internalize the extraordinary experiences of these lumanaries of humanity to the best of our abilities; so that these may be re-lived to the maximum possible extent in our own humble souls, Thus alone shall we be born again and be released from the bondage of cultural determinism. This is, however, by no means, an easy, affair. Nevertheless, it is a real uphill task. It may be recalled that Dilthey worked for full forty years on the sciences of human spirit (Geisteswissenscha ften ); then he could arrive at their methodology. This is a methodology, primarily, about transferring or transmitting the experiences of the great founders of human culture to the generality of mankind. Among other things, Dilthey has insisted on the experiential rather than the barely intellectual or academical interpretations (Hermeunities) of the great texts. It is through the former type of interpretation alone that we are enabled to have true intuitive comprehension (Verstchn) of the inner import of these texts. It is heartening to note that Allama Iqbal has advocated a method for the comprehension of the text. of the Quran which is almost identical with that of Dilthey. The Allama says in his Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam : â€Å"No understanding of the Holy Book is possible until it is revealed to the believer just as it was revealed to the Prophet†. This most remarkable statement, unique in the history of Islamic thought, is to be found in the opening’ passage of Lecture VII of the Reconstruction, a, lecture addressed originally to the very learned audience of the Aristotelian Society in London (on the 5th of December, 1932). Though the Allama has ascribed this statement to an unnamed Muslim Sufi (sic), I, on the basis of my study of the Reconstruction and experience of expounding its text to a few generations of students for the last more than 20 years, beg to differ with him and aver that the said statement is positively his own. The Allama has ascribed it to an unknown Sufi, to my mind, only because he had great misgivings about the way it might be received by the traditional scholars of Islam. Let me add that the statement is purely prescriptive and not descriptive in the usual sense; it does not refer to a fact, here a credal fact, i. e. , a belief; it only exhorts us to do something in a certain way if we want to have a desired end. So, as a prescriptive statement, it strongly recommends to us a method for the true comprehension of the meanings of the Quran. It tells us that a true believer must so deeply interiorize the meanings of the Holy Book that he starts almost re-living certain â€Å"experiences† on account of which, these meanings were comprehended by or revealed to the Prophet. Thus, the reference here is essentially to a spiritual process or method through which alone (and the true believers have no choice in this matter) a true believer would comprehend the meanings of the Quranic text closest possible to the comprehension of the Prophet. This perhaps is the only, though very arduous, way of deepening or intensifying our Islamic consciousness. The statement, however, is open to the misinterpretation that in so far as it recommends the believer to do something which is very close to Prophet’s very unique way of doing it, it implies or suggests that the believer is raised to the status of the Prophet and this is sacrilegeous. It is to be noted that the true believer’s being raised in his status is purely and entirely epistemic or experiential which is a blessing, not ontic, real, or actual which is impossible, or, as James Wards puts it, the most impossible of all things in the world. We cannot be a Plato or a Shakespeare, how can we be an Abraham, a Moses or a Muhammad? May God forgive us for any such thoughts. At the time of writing Lecture VII which embodies the above statement, i. e. , September 1932, the Allama was very busy and much preoccupied in so many things Javid Nama was to come soon in December; in October he was to leave for Third Round Table Conference and so on. He did not want to be disturbed just because the great traditional scholars would not renderstand him on an important academic statement of his; so in haste he foisted it on a Muslim Sufi. Please note the rather unusual expression â€Å"the Muslim Sufi†, most unexpected of Iqbal, as perfect a master of English diction- as that of Persian. â€Å"The Muslim Sufi’, as if there could be also Christian or Hindu Sufis, betrays the very divided feelings or moments of hesitation at the time of thinking of this expression and tacitly nodding to it: â€Å"Let it go! † He was keenly aware of the profound religious meanings embodied in the above statement but also painfully aware of the spiritual opacity of his co-religionists who might be displeased with it. He was divided between pleasing his eo-religionists and pleasing himself. So he chose to father the statement on a â€Å"Muslim Sufi† he would not name, and thus please both himself and his brethren in faith nobody would know that the â€Å"Muslim Sufi† was he himself. It is generally narrated that somewhere in early November, 1933, on way back from Afghanistan Iqbal told Syed Sulaiman Nadvi that the Sufi referred to in the above statement was no other than his own father. The very fact that the name of the author of the statement â€Å"popped up† signifies that the statement must have struck the Syed extraordinary. More notable, however, is the fact that the great Syed accepted Iqbal’s assertion as it was and did not comment on it nor added anything to it not even later. He did not say, for example: â€Å"I am so pleased to know this†. But my dear friend, it is nothing very original, it may as well be found in Ghazali, Rumi, Ibn Arabi, Jili, Mujaddid Alit Thani, or any name like them. It looks rather odd that the Iqbal scholars have quietly agreed to foist such an important and methodologically most significant statement on a Sufi, who never had any pretensions whatsoever in the Sufi-lore nor in the subtle and profound ways of the Sufis. Would it be better to be rich and ugly, or poor but beautiful? The Philosophy of Man is another name for mans study of philosophy. Philosophy is defined as the study of general and fundamental problems. These problems are typically related to fields such as knowledge, existence, reason, mind, values and language. The approach that philosophers take is different from other ways of addressing the problems due to it being critical and systematic. It also carries a heavy reliance on rational argument. There are a number of different of branches of the Philosophy of Man, some of these are listed below. †¢ Metaphysics. This considers the study of the nature of reality. This can include the relationship between body and mind as well as substance and accident and causation and events. Within metaphysics there are other branches including ontology and cosmology. †¢ Ethics. This is sometimes referred to as moral philosophy. Ethics deals mainly with the question about what is the best way to live and whether this is a question that can actually be answered. Ethics can be subdivided into normative ethics, applied ethics and meta-ethics. †¢ Epistemology. This is concerned with the scope and nature of knowledge. It also poses the question about whether knowledge is possible. It is often concerned with the challenge posed by skepticism and studies the relationships between truth, justification and belief. †¢ Logic. Within philosophy the study of logic is that of valid argument forms. The subject of logic can be separated into two branches, mathematical logic and philosophical logic. †¢ Political philosophy. The study of the government and the relationship of individuals to states is something that is becoming more popular within the philosophical world. Questions are posed about justice, law, rights and obligations and it is often closely linked with ethics. Philosophy A philosophy is a system of beliefs about reality. It is ones integrated view of the world. It includes an understanding of the nature of existence, man, and his role in the world. Philosophy is the foundation of knowledge. It is the standard by which ideas are integrated and understood. Philosophy is a necessary product of mans rational mind. To live, man must gain knowledge of the world. To understand the world, man must form conclusions about its very nature. For instance, to gain knowledge of particular objects, man must recognize that objects have identity. He must recognize that conclusions are possible because the world does exist, and exists in a particular way. Philosophy provides the framework for which man can understand the world. It provides the premises by which man can discover truth, and use his mind to support his life. Every man has an understanding of the world. Every man must have a philosophy, even if it is never made explicit. Philosophy of the Human Person’s Selected Theses The following are the five (5) selected theses that I shall endeavourto explicate and exemplify: 1. â€Å"Philosophy is the science of knowledge. But the outcome of any philosophical inquiry is determined by its starting place . †Ã¢â‚¬â€œ Michael Novak (Belief and Unbelief); 2. â€Å" The intrinsic objectivity of humancognitional activity is its intentionality. † Bernard Lonergan, SJ (CognitionalStructure); 3. â€Å" Reflection is one of the life’s ways of rising from one level of being to another† Gabriel Marcel (Primary and Secondary Reflection: TheExistential Fulcrum); 4. â€Å"Each symbol gives rise to comprehension by meansof interpretation . † Paul Ricoeur (The Symbol : Food for Thought); and 5. â€Å" Wehave the existential presence which is a common spiritual bond in virtue of which each is present in the other and participates in the being of another† -Engelbert Van Croonenburg (Man and Fellow- Man). â€Å" Philosophy.

Review of How We Do Harm by Otis Brawley and Paul Goldberger

Review of How We Do Harm by Otis Brawley and Paul Goldberger In America, there is an underlying assumption that medical professionals placing their patients care above all else. We believe that our physicians follow important concepts such as the principle of beneficence, and the principle of nonmaleficence. Yet in the book How We Do Harm, Brawley introduces his readers to the back rooms and the unknown conversations of those in who are a part of the medical profession. This insiders perspective is Brawley’s (and his co-author) real genius, the ways he makes makes what could otherwise be an esoteric and dense topic become an enjoyable book. Though a joke about how important money is to the american medical system A Wallet Biopsy, its one that is important because if you can afford the best care,get the best care. If however, you cannot get good care, you get the a bare minimum of care. Yet Brawley does not make this a purely socialist critique. In many ways, Brawley acknowledges that wealth can cause its own problems in America. Patients with sufficient wealth often demand treatment that borders on irrational, and for those with means finding a doctor willing to satisfy their concerns is not hard. The reason for this treatment seeking behavior, is that the American healthcare system is not design to prevent elective treatments which are not only not necessary but also often quite expensive. Yet the doctors are not dupes and the reason why there is always a doctor willing to give into to the demands of patients providing they can pay the costs. Yet at the same time Brawley is not seeking to place physicians on a pedestal who can do no harm. Brawley introduces us to two different but equally heartbreaking cases Helen and Lillia. Helen’s story is a used has an exemplar of the â€Å"more is better† philosophy Brawley sees as endemic in the medical community. After having a mastectomy lump, her oncologist She was â€Å"offered† post surgical chemotherapy. Her oncologist explained that a stronger dose is better than a weaker dose. â€Å"More is better† notes Brawley had been the fallback strategy for oncology since the 1950s with the general opinion being that , more chemotherapy translated to greater the more effectiveness. Yet for Brawley this approach is not the real tragedy of Helens story is that she was recommended a autologous bone marrow transplantation since her insurance company will pay for more of the costs of the transplant and chemotherapy (page 32). As a result of this treatment, Helen experienced far more severe complications than expected and ultimately these complications kept her in the hospital for five months and is then transferred to a rehabilitation hospital. Taken altogether this â€Å"recommended† procedure cost her a year of her life. Then three years later, Helen discovers that this painful experience had no demonstrable effect in improving survival. When Helen asked her oncologist , her oncologist responds â€Å"this was what everybody was doing at the time.† Brawley does points out that Helen is not alone as between 1989 and 2001 at least 23000 women might ha In the second case, Lilla Romeo was first diagnosed with breast cancer (Stage 1) in 1995. She had surgery followed by radiation. Five years after the initial diagnosis, a routine scan (how many scans did she have in the 5 years?) showed the disease had returned. The doctors told her that â€Å"the prognosis turned grim†¦the cancer was incurable, and the goal of treatment was to delay the inevitable.† So Lilla was persuaded, and started non-stop chemotherapy (page 71). In 2003, Lilla remembered an oncology nurse at the New York University Medical asked if she was feeling tired and with a hemoglobin reading just under ten, she was â€Å"suggested and offered† cancer-fatigue drugs (at that time, the popular one was Procrit by JJ) In 2004, she was told that the hospital had switched from Procrit to another drug, Aranesp (manufactured by AMGEN), which caused a burning sensation under her stain at the injection site (page 79). In 2010, when she requested copies of her medical records from the doctors who had treated her, Lilla learned that she had received a lot more Procrit and Aranesp than she knew. Her first dose was administered on 1/11/2001 and then almost weekly thereafter. Altogether, she was given 221 1/2 doses. When Lilla was started on the hemoglobin-building drugs (also known as ESAs), little did she know that the drug companies manufactured a medical condition: cancer fatigue. She also had no idea that â€Å"her infusion was the front-row seat for observing a spectacular, indeed, cataclysmic, failure in medicine.† Dr Brawley strongly believed that these drugs have shortened Lilla’s life. She died on June 9, 2010 at the age of 63 (Just before her death, Lilla was suggested and given â€Å"Avastin†!!) Finally, there is the case of Ralph DeAngelo, who was prescribed aggressive prostate cancer treatment after a positive prostatic specific antigen (PSA) screening. Unfortunately for Ralph DeAngelo, PSA screening has lead to financial gain to many medical businesses, but Ralph DeAngelo ended-up incontinent, sexually impotent, and with a rectal fistula into the bladder (Brawley Goldberg, 2011, pp.215-230). It was very eye-opening to find out that physicians may sometimes prescribe experimental drugs to patients with little or no detailed information or informed consent about the potential side effects and the eventual lack of thorough trial studies on a given drug. It was also sad to be reminded that the American healthcare system lacks good use of its resources. This is particularly true for the â€Å"working-poors† who lack proper access to healthcare. By the time they qualify for Medicaid, they are so sick that their situation is so dire that it’s likely to have a negative outcome. Finally, it was disconcerting to find out that physicians may prescribe some expensive and potentially harmful screenings to patients for their sole financial gains. Part III: Corroboration. Studies have shown that despite the advances made in the war against cancer, there are many disparities in the delivery of care, based on factors such as race, income, and geographic area. Many patients report problems such as lack of insurance, high co-payment for prescription drugs and transportation issues. In addition, African-Americans are more likely to be diagnosed of advance stage cancer than Caucasians (Schwaderer Itano, 2007). In addition, despites their widespread use, some screening tests such as the PSA have shown some limitations. About 75 percent of positive PSA test are false positive, which may be associated with psychological harm more than a year after the test. In addition, diagnostic testing and aggressive treatment of a non life threatening prostate cancer may result in adverse consequences such as erectile dysfunction, incontinence, and even patient’s death (Slatkoff, Gamboa, Zolotor, Mounsey Jones, 2011). Shortly after he turned 70, Mr. Ralph De Angelo, a retired department–store manager in the heart of black America, saw a newspaper advertisement that claimed that prostate cancer screening saves lives. The advertisement also mentioned that 95% of men diagnosed with localized disease are cured. The following is the tragic story of Mr. De Angelo after his prostate screening and how unnecessary harm can be done to those who go for screening of the prostate, breast, etc. This is a classic example of collateral damage (due to overtreatment) described in the book â€Å"HOW WE DO HARM† by Dr Otis Webb Brawley, MD a medical oncologist and Executive Vice President of the American Cancer Society. In 2005, Mr. De Angelo, after his prostate screening, was diagnosed with prostate cancer, with a PSA reading of 4.3 ng/ml (just 0.3 above is considered normal). He was urged to have a biopsy. Two of the 12 biopsies showed cancer. The Gleason score was 3 plus 3 which is associated with the most commonly diagnosed and most commonly treated form of prostate cancer. There is no way to know whether a patient with this diagnosis will develop metastatic disease or live a normal life unaffected by the disease. With this uncertainty, Mr. De Angelo was persuaded by his urologist to perform a radical robotic prostatectomy which he (the urologist) thought was the gold standard of care. After the operation, he was told he had a small tumour 5mm by 5mm x 6mm in a moderate size (50cc) prostate. The tumour was all in the right side of the prostate. This means that the tumor didn’t appear highly aggressive under the microscope. Good news? Unfortunately, Ralph realized that he was then incontinent. Three months later, the incontinence was still there and he had to wear pampers continuously. Besides incontinence, Ralph was also impotent and given Viagra. With a lingering 0.95 ng/ml (even though his prostate has been removed), a radiation oncologist suggested â€Å"salvage radiation therapy† to the pelvis. Four weeks into the radiation, Ralph saw blood in his stool. This was due to radiation proctitis, i.e. radiation damage to the rectum. He continued having incontinence, but also developed a burning sensation upon urination. Later, Mr. De Angelo stopped his radiation with one more week to go. For the rectal proctitis, he went to a gastroenterologist, who prescribed steroids in rectal foam that he had to put up his rectum four times a day. About three weeks after stopping the radiation, Mr. De Angelo realised that whenever he passed gas, some of it came out of his urethra. He also sensed liquid from his rectum soiling his diapers. He was confirmed having a rectal fistula into the bladder†¦there was a hole between Ralph’s rectum and his bladder. After several urinary infections and when the fistula didn’t seem to be healing, he had to see a GI surgeon. He performed a colostomy to keep stool off the inflamed rectum and the hole into the bladder. The next step was an ureterostomy, a surgery that will bring urine to abdominal wall and collect it in a bag, just like his bowel movements. In Dec 2009, Mr. De Angelo’s daughter called Dr Brawley to inform that her father had â€Å"urinary tract infection† which later progressed to sepsis, a widespread bacterial infection in the blood. On the fifth day of hospitalisation, Ralph passed away (only 4 years from diagnosis). Interestingly†¦Ã¢â‚¬ the death certificate reads that death was caused by a urinary tract infection. It doesn’t mention that the urinary tract infection was due to his prostate-cancer treatment and a radiation-induced fistula†¦.Mr. De Angelo’s death will not be considered a death due to prostate cancer, even though his death was caused by the cure. In conclusion, Dr Brawley strongly believed that†¦ â€Å"the majority of these men, who are treated with radiation or hormones or both, got no benefit from treatment. They get only the side effects including those that Mr. De Angelo had: proctitis i.e. inflammation and bleeding from the rectum, cystitis, burning sensation on urination and a feeling of urgency, a rectal fistula in which bowels and bladder are connected. The side effects of hormones can be diabetes, cardiac diseases, osteoporosis, and muscle loss. In the case of Mr. Ralph De Angelo, both the surgeon and the radiation oncologist got paid handsomely. They both likely thought they were doing the right thing. However, Ralph got the side effects, and his quality of life was destroyed (too much collateral damage?). One parting remark by Dr Otis Webb Brawley which is very relevant to this article: â€Å"Prostate-cancer screening and aggressive treatment may save lives, but it definitely sells adult diapers â€Å" Part IV: Practice Application. After reading How We Do Harm, I think that it would affect my nursing practice in many ways. As healthcare professional, this book reminds me of the importance of staying current with my nursing knowledge through continuing education, and reading resources from organizations such as the Mayo Clinic, the American Nurses’ Association and the Center for Diseases Control and Prevention. In addition, as patient advocate, this book reinforces my desire to empower all patients under my care, so that they may be active partners in their healthcare. More than ever, I will encourage my patients to educate themselves on their diseases; in addition, I will encourage my patients to learn more about all treatments options so that they may make the best choice for their healthcare. How American Medicine Does Harm To Patients With powerful incentives set in motion, many hospitals and oncology practices in the US instructed nurses to ask leading questions about â€Å"fatigue† with the intent of expanding sales to a growing number of patients and upping the dosage to each patient. This is referred to as â€Å"an ESA treatment opportunity† (ESA means erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, drugs used to overcome fatigue, low blood counts). (page 85). To increase their earnings, drug companies and doctors set out on a search for treatment opportunities, often forgetting about the sacred trust between doctors and patients (page 85). The exact magnitude of harm is harder to gauge†¦most of the money was spent on drugs (e.g. ESAs) that were prescribed for the wrong reasons and under false, manufactured pretences. These drugs were not used to cure disease or make patients feel better. They were used to make money for doctors and pharmaceutical companies at the expense of patients, insurance companies†¦the technical term for this is overtreatment and overtreatment equals harm (page 97). Doctors do some horrible, irrational things under the guise of seeking to benefit patients†¦.For example offering a bone marrow transplant for a breast cancer patient, prophylactic doses of ESA drugs†¦these are only a few examples. The system rewards us for selling our goods and services, and we play the game (page 122). You don’t deviate from the science. You don’t make it up as you are going along. You have to have a reason to give the drugs you are giving. You have to tell the patients the truth (page 145). Commenting further on ESA drugs, some doctors didn’t bother to check what the patient’s haemoglobin was and erred on the side of giving the ESA every time they give chemotherapy. Doctors routinely prescribed the drugs for uses, in which it had not been studied-such as anaemia caused by cancer itself, as opposed to anaemia caused by chemotherapy (page 78). †¦.Doctors try out things just to see whether they will work (page 160) Earlier in the book (page 29), Dr Brawley mentioned that â€Å"A hospital was the place where they withheld treatment or where they tried things on you without telling you what they were doing and why (page 29/30). When a drug succeeds in controlling cancer, we learn about it at conferences and in scientific journals. Stories of our fiascos, though no less instructive, are almost invisible, especially if there are cautionary tales that lay bare the fundamental flaws in the system (page 157). Cancer is hard to understand, and yet doctors rush patients (page 182). Survival measures time that elapses after diagnosis. By diagnosing a cancer earlier, survival rates are increased. The more you diagnose, the more you push up survival (page 193). Somewhere along the way, we have been conditioned to believe that a new treatment is always better (page 197) A new drug must be better than the old. A new medical device must also be better (page 202). Inappropriate use of certain drugs can be attributed to the profit motive. A recent study of prescribing pattern demonstrated that as soon as the profit motive weakened, inappropriate prescribing of these drugs dropped (page 197). The overuse of radiologic imaging is a major problem†¦..†up to one-third of radiologic imaging tests are unnecessary. This is a serious problem, not just because these tests are expensive, but because they expose the patient to radiation that can cause cancer. Some have estimated that 1% of cancers in the United States are caused by radiation from medical imaging† (page 202). Even when administered properly, cancer drugs can bring the patient to the brink of death. An overdose can easily push him off the cliff (page 279). Much of the money currently spent on healthcare (in the US) is money wasted on unnecessary and harmful, sick care. Even for the sick, a lot of necessary care is not given at the appropriate time. The result is more expensive care given later (page 281). The medical profession frequently allows bad doctors to continue to practice. The profession doesn’t police itself. Chalk it all up to apathy. Or ignorance (page 282). Many physicians are ignorant of some aspects of the field of medicine in which they practice. They tend to think the newer pill or newer treatment must be better because it is new. Ignorance is a failure to think deeply. It is a failure to be inquisitive. It is a failure to keep an open mind (page 282). Dr Brawley’s most direct critique of our healthcare system â€Å".†America does not have a health-care system. We have a sick-care system†.

feminaw Suicide as the Only Alternative for Edna Pontellier in The Awakening :: Chopin Awakening Essays

Suicide as the Only Alternative in The Awakening   Ã‚   In Kate Chopin's The Awakening, the principal character, Edna decides to kill herself rather than to live a lie. It seemed to Kate that the time of her own death was the only thing remaining under her control since society had already decided the rest of her life for her.   Edna was a woman of the wrong times; she wanted her independence and she wanted to be with her lover, Robert.   This type of behavior would never be accepted by the society of her time.   Edna's relationship with Robert, and her rejection of the role dictated to her by society, resulted in her perceiving suicide to be the only solution to her problems.    Critics of Kate Chopin's The Awakening tend to read the novel as the dramatization of a woman's struggle to achieve selfhood--a struggle doomed failure either because the patriarchal conventions of her society restrict freedom, or because the ideal of selfhood that she pursue is a masculine defined one that allows for none of the physical and undeniable claims which maternity makes upon women. Ultimately. in both views, Edna Pontellier ends her life because she cannot have it both ways: given her time, place, and notion of self, she cannot be a mother and have a self. (Simons)      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Edna Pontellier could not have what she wanted.   There are many arguments about Edna being selfish for ending her life and leaving her children behind.   "Edna does indeed dread 'being reduced to her biological function, 'but this is what the Creole culture does to women , as Priscilla Leder suggests" (Simons).  Ã‚   She could not offer the love that children deserve from a parent.   I do not feel that she was selfish, she did not love her children the way a mother-woman would.   A mother-woman is someone who puts her children before anything else in her life.   Edna is not one of those "mother-women" who "esteemed it a holy privilege to efface themselves as individuals and grow wings as ministering angels"; she is, rather a twenty-eight-year-old woman who hears 'the voice of the sea,' which seduces 'the soul to wander for a spell in abysses of solitude; to lose itself in inward contemplation'." (Toth)   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Edna needed to be in control of her life.   As long as she was married and a mother she would never have total control.

King Lear vs. The Stone Angel Essay -- essays research papers fc

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  It has been said that, â€Å"Rivers and mountains may change; human nature, never.†(worldofquotes.com) This is a quote that can be deconstructed when examining William Shakespeare’s King Lear and Margaret Laurence’s The Stone Angel. When reviewing the two books the main characters, King Lear and Hagar, are easily comparable. The first similarity becomes apparent when King Lear and Hagar are both developed as flawed characters. Secondly, because of their flaws the two characters become blind to reality. Thirdly, after being deceived by themselves and others as a result of their blindness, both characters seek refuge outside of their own homes. By leaving their homes the characters are able to gain perspective on themselves and their pasts. Finally, despite these similarities between King Lear and Hagar, a significant difference prevails after the characters experience their epiphanies and are awarded a chance to redeem themselves. When explori ng King Lear and The Stone Angel it becomes clear that although both main characters engage in similar journeys to self discovery a critical difference between the two books exists in the character’s ability to redeem themselves after their epiphany.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  It first became clear that Shakespeare’s King Lear and Laurence’s Hagar Shipley were similar main characters when their personalities were developed with flaws. King Lear was immediately revealed as an imperfect character when he was shown in his somewhat conflicting roles as a father and a king. After resolving to divide his kingdom amongst his three daughters Lear develops a way to decide how his power and land will be divided. Looking to his three children Lear probes, â€Å"Tell me, my daughters/ (Since now we will divest us both of rule,/ Interest of territory, cares of state),/ Which of you shall we say doth love us most?/ That we our largest bounty may extend/ Where nature doth with merit challenge.†(I.i.49-54) It is at this point in the play that King Lear reveals himself as superficial. Knowing he had already divided his land in three Lear could have presented it to his daughters as each receives one third of the kingdom. However, Lea r is flawed in that he is superficial and rather than hand over his land and power he would rather hear his daughters competitively praise him for it. Similarly to Lear’s flaw Hagar is... ... his faults and change to redeem himself Hagar was only able to recognize her own flaws.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  In conclusion, when comparing the main characters from King Lear and The Stone Angel it is clear that although the characters endure a similar path to self discovery their outcomes prove them to be very different. This has been shown first by their development as flawed characters. Secondly, as a result of their flaws both characters become blind to others’ actions as well as their own. Thirdly, both characters remove themselves form their usual environment where they experience their epiphany and are able to recognize their own flaws. Finally, despite all of these similarities, the two characters experience very different outcomes of their epiphanies. These two books bring an interesting perspective to the question of whether or not human nature can be altered. In the case of these two authentic characters, one changed where the other could not. Works Cited Laurence, Margaret. The Stone Angel. McClelland & Stewart Ltd: Toronto, 1988. Shakespeare, William. King Lear. Harcourt Canada Ltd. World of Quotes. 19 Ma. 2005 http://www.worldofquotes.com/search.php

Cultural Research Paper

Final Cultural Research Paper Throughout this course, we have learned that the primary mode of subsistence (how a culture makes a living) impacts many other aspects of cultural behavior and has been an effective way to organize thoughts and studies about culture. In order to demonstrate your understanding of subsistence modes and its impact on a culture and why a culture acts as it does, your Research Paper will require you to: 1. Select a specific culture from the following list: a. Basseri of Iran . The Batek of Malaysia c. Enga d. The Amish e. Huaorani of Ecuador f. Bedouin g. Zulu h. Kurds i. Maori j. Mbuti k. Nayar of India l. Semai m. Navajo n. Tikopia of Melanesia 2. Research this culture using the Ashford University Online Library. Please identify and use a minimum of three scholarly articles from the library in addition to the text your research. Keep in mind that most anthropological research, whether article length or book length, is either an ethnography or an ethnology.Y ou may use any combination of ethnographies or ethnologies in your paper. 3. Write a seven to eight page long research paper that does the following: a. Identifies and classifies the selected culture’s primary mode of subsistence. ( Foragers, Horticulturalists, Pastoralists, Emerging Agriculturalists, Agrarian States, or Industrialists) b. Analyzes and evaluates the impact that the primary mode of subsistence of the selected culture has on at least three of the following aspects of culture: ?Beliefs and values ?Economic organization ?Gender relations ?Kinship ?Political organization ?Sickness and healing ?Social change ?Social organization The Research Paper must be formatted according to APA style and include a title and a reference page (which does not count towards the page length). For information regarding APA samples and tutorials, visit the Ashford Writing Center, within the Learning Resources tab on the left navigation toolbar.In Week Three, you are required to submit an introductory paragraph, thesis statement, an outline, and your properly formatted reference page with the required sources identified. At that point, you should have chosen your culture and identified its primary mode of subsistence. Writing the Research Paper The Research Paper: 1. Must be seven to eight double-spaced pages in length, and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. 2. Must include a title page with the following: