The Author Argues That The Spanish Were Completely At Fault For The To

The author argues that the Spanish were completely at fault for the total destruction of the Aztec Empire. In Broken spears, the author explains how many factors other than Spanish power contributed to the downfall of the Aztecs. Not only did the Spanish have many advantages over the Aztecs, but also they also exploited them and took advantage of the cultural difference. The main key aspects to the Spanish victory, is that the Spanish were viewed as gods at first because of their appearance, the Aztecs welcomed the Spanish with gifts and festivities, which showed the Spanish had total control of people. The Aztecs also held a ritual ceremony for the arrival of the "god" that included a human sacrifice, which was seen by the Spanish as a disgusting act, this trigged Spanish hatred for the Aztecs. When the Spanish saw the resources that the Aztecs had, they quickly started taking advantage of the Aztecs weaknesses. The Spanish had more power; they were better equipped than the Aztecs a nd more advanced. The Aztecs' leader Montecuhzoma was a weak leader, he was more of a coward, more concerned with his well being and safety than the safety of his people and kingdom so he quickly surrendered under pressure. The Spanish used surrounding enemy tribes to take over the Aztec lands, then began to massacre men, women and children. When the Aztec became angry and started to fight back, they were quickly wrecked by the diseases the Spanish brought with them such as small pox and measles. The Spanish were immune to these diseases because they were well known in Europe and they had been exposed to them for years, but the Aztecs weren't so entire villages were wiped out in just few weeks which cleared the way for the Spanish to entirely conquer and destroy the Aztec empire. Leon-Portilla based the stories told in this book upon old writings of actual Aztec people who survived the Spanish massacres. The actual authors of the stories told in this book are priests, wise men and regular people who survived the killings. These stories represent the more realistic view of what really happened during the Spanish conquest. Most of the history about the Aztec Empire was based on Spanish accounts of events, but Leon-Portilla used writings from actual survivors to illustrate the true history from the Indians' point of view. The book focuses on how the Spanish slowly exploited the Aztec resources to the point where they started killing people for no reason but to exterminate them. One of the turning events during the Spanish conquest is the massacre in the main temple during the fiesta Toxcatl. The Aztecs begged their king to hold festivities in honor of the god Huitzilopochtli. After they got permission, they very carefully prepared for festivities and sworn to do their best dancing at the festivities to show the Spanish the beauty of their rituals. The Spanish showed that they are interested to learn more about the festivities, but they were planning to murder all the celebrants. When the celebrations began, the Spanish showed up in their armors and carried weapons. Soon after, they sealed off all entrances to the palace so that no one can leave, and then they engaged in massive killing of everyone that participated. They brutally murdered every living person they could find. This event was very import ant, because it triggered the anger of the Aztecs, the people no longer wanted to obey the king who advised them not to fight back, they no longer believed that the Spanish were sacred. The Aztecs were angry and wanted revenge, chaos reigned over the entire empire. From that point on, there was nothing but battles between the Spanish and the Aztecs; it also resulted in the murder of the Aztec king who was no longer useful after the massacre. This brings a logical explanation for why the Chinese refused to let Europeans into their culture. The Chinese did not commit the same mistake as the Aztecs, The Chinese strictly controlled all aspects of contact between all European encounters and Chinese people, this is the main reason why the Chinese people were not as badly exploited and exterminated as the Aztecs

England and Stalin essays

England and Stalin essays Elizabethan England and Russia during Stalin There are and have been many cultures upon this earth. There are cultures that might seem weird to us and cultures that look at us in wonderment. They have different lifestyles and whole different outlooks on life. Studying cultures is a work in itself. By studying and comparing other cultures, we can find out more about our culture and ourselves. Cultures contain different folkways. In the Random House Dictionary, folkways is defined as the ways of living and acting in a human group, built up without conscious design but serving as compelling guides of conduct(551). For example in our society we could define marriage folkways for LDS, and explain why it happens so early and also how the law of chastity plays a big part upon that. Elizabethan England is a culture full of folkways that might seem different to us, but explain to us a lot about our culture also. While Stalin was in control of Russia, the cultures there are hard for us to understand. It was much different fro m our culture now, and we can also learn a lot from them. Elizabethans refers to all those that lived in England during the time of Queen Elizabeths reign. Stalinism defined Stalins totalitarian control. Elizabeth I lived from 1533-1603 .She was the daughter of King Henry VIII, and because of no males in the order she became queen in 1558. She reigned for 45 years (Adler 320). This was a time where they were making the change to become more modern, but still had the effects of the old society upon them. Stalin lived from 1879 -1953 (Adler p. 636). He lived in Russia during a time of great depression. The old government was struggling and looking for a new hope to guide them to have a better economy. This struggle to change is shown in a look at their folkways. I think if one compares Elizabethan England and Stalins Russias social ways, marriage ways, and religiou...

Why Are We Happy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Why Are We Happy - Essay Example In his speech, Gilbert had broken down happiness in two categories: Synthetic and Natural. As he noted, â€Å"Natural happiness is when we get what we wanted and Synthetic Happiness is what we make when we don’t get what we wanted.† (â€Å"TED Talks: Dan Gilbert asks†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ). Normally, people will think that synthetic happiness is not true happiness but a defense mechanism to avoid hurting our egos. However, based on the studies that the speaker presented, it is scientifically proven that people tend to accept the end result of whatever decisions that they make no matter how unfortunate it is, and eventually become truly happy about it. To illustrate this, he exhibited a study between the percentage of happiness of lottery winners and paraplegics after a year. The data showed that the level of happiness between the two groups of people was equal. The lottery winners might have a higher level of happiness in the beginning but it evened out during the course of th e year. This is because the mind has the capacity to synthesize happiness thus it can alter the initial response to a situation into a better one. As Gilbert explained, â€Å"The fact is, year after they lose their leg, and a year after winning the lotto, lottery winners and paraplegics are equally happy with their lives†¦ The research that my laboratory has been doing†¦ had revealed something really startling to us. Something that we call the impact bias is the tendency for the simulator to work badly. For the simulator to make you believe that different outcomes are more different than the fact that they really are.† (â€Å"TED Talks: Dan Gilbert asks†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ). During the presentation, it can be observed that the speaker connects to the audience and everybody seems to be actually listening throughout the whole time. Noticeably, the three elements of effective arguments or appeals by Aristotle, ethos, pathos, and logos, were essentially delivered. Ethos refe rs to the appeal to the character of the speaker (Kennedy). It further demonstrates that if the speaker is credible, reliable or respected enough, his audience will actually believe the message that he’s trying to convey.

NutriSoil LS Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

NutriSoil LS - Essay Example Worm leachate is extracted and packaged as NutriSoil LS in 2 liter, 5 liter, 25 liter and 1000 liter tanks. Leachate is liquid that drains from landfills. NutriSoil LS claims it helps produce higher yield per acre and a higher rate of growth. There is scant data to support or refute these claims. One company report published represents the pseudoscientific method on which some of these claims are based (http://www.nutrisoil.com.au/farmers). In 2008, NutriSoil researchers planted 900 acres of hay to presumably demonstrate the effectiveness of their product. They conducted trials in on two 30 acre plots planted next to one another. They reportedly cut large round bales of hay in late October and again in early January 2009. Neither plot was artificially irrigated. They applied NutriSoil at 5L per hectare in September 2008 and again after the first hay cut. Their yield reports were as follows: Ultimately the findings do not impact the claims of NutriSoil LS at all. The study reports do not meet minimum methodological standards.

Fair And Equitable Treatment Of Organizational Stakeholders Essay

Fair And Equitable Treatment Of Organizational Stakeholders - Essay Example It continues by indentifying various performance criteria including those which focus on financial performance and those associated with the concept of a ‘triple bottom line’. To assist in reaching conclusions about the merits of competing views, the paper analyses the various drivers including the competitive environment, corporate governance, agency theory and sustainability. An approach that was prompted by the views of D’Aveni,(1994) that fair and equitable stakeholder engagement has always played an important role within corporate governance and is important for the success of an organisation especially within highly competitive markets. Stakeholders In any organization there are a number of stakeholder groups as represented by the traditional form of the stakeholder model (Figure 1). Each of these groups may have different views about how the organisation should behave (Palmer and Hartley, 2011, p178); employees, for example, may feel unfairly treated if they are not rewarded adequately or are not given the right working conditions. Supply chain associates expect organizations to honour their contracts whist government is increasingly expecting business organizations to take over many responsibilities from the public sector such as in the payment of sickness, maternity and other benefits (Palmer and Hartley, 2011, p182). ... They expect the firm’s management to meet their expectations and take care of their needs, and allow them to take part in various decision-making activities that can influence the interests that are at risk (Ulmer, 2001). Consumers buy products that bring in revenues for the corporation and, which can be used for developing new items and services as well as in adding quality to existing products (Cohen and Prusak, 2001). Thus, the consumers possess a legal and reasonable interest in the quality of the products and services being provided by a firm and in the nature of the information provided such as the potential harmful effects of products like alcohol or cigarettes. They expect the firm to adopt a more consumer friendly and quality oriented approach on the basis that it will encourage them to buy more goods and services which in turn helps to improve the performance of the organisation. Suppliers are important to any business as they provide raw materials and other inputs w hich the firm requires to produce its goods and/or services. Therefore, the firms are clients of, and hence in a relationship with the supplier. The latter has its money at risk, for example it may be invested in raw materials (Cohen and Prusak, 2001). This is of special importance to minor suppliers which are dependent on large corporations, especially if they are their chief or even only client. In such cases of high dependencies, these small suppliers tend to focus on improving the quality of products delivered to the large firms, which further increases the level of dependency on their clients. Here the suppliers seek to bargain for a more close relationship with the client-firms, and not be

Little Albert and David Reimer: Ethical Analysis

Little Albert and David Reimer: Ethical Analysis Ethics Essay Introduction All psychological studies focusing on human being needs to obtain ethical approval by the Psychology Research Ethics Committee. Psychologist wishing to conduct a research/study must first submit a filled in form of psychology ethics committee application cover page, write up a detail proposal describing the research process and attach any supporting documents. These steps are compulsory prior to research in order to protect participants from inhumane harm. Due to past examples of highly unethical research like the â€Å"Little Albert† experiment and â€Å"David Reimer† experiment, it has triggered psychological societies to issue a code of ethics in psychology which provides ethical guidelines for researchers. The code of ethics includes informed consent, voluntary participation, right to withdraw, accurate reporting, do no harm, debriefing and desensitisation. Experiment 1 – Unethical Reasons The first example of past research that would be considered unethical by today’s guidelines is the â€Å"Little Albert† experiment. The experiment is conducted in 1920 at John’s Hopkins University by behavioural psychologist John B. Watson and his assistant. The purpose of the experiment was to investigate whether fear is something born with or can be learned due to exposure of environmental influences; and if phobia can be developed by classical conditioning. The participant was 9 month old infant, Little Albert. In the experiment, Little Albert was first exposed to various white or furry objects and happenings that usually cause fear. Next, a white lab rat was given to Albert and he showed no fear. Watson then made loud banging sounds behind Albert’s back every time he touched the rat – Little Albert cried. He became upset when he was exposed to the white rat again as he linked the rat with the banging noise produced. First of all, the experiment has breached the â€Å"do no harm† guideline as Little Albert was not protected from psychological harm – the main purpose of the experiment is to test if fear can be developed by classical conditioning. Also, Watson knew that there will be not be sufficient time left to treat any possible fears/harms caused. Secondly, the â€Å"voluntary participation† guideline is breached as Little Albert did not volunteer for the study, he is too young. Little Albert was chosen from the hospital where his mother worked as a wet nurse. She is financially dependent on the hospital for income and feared that she would lose her job if she disagreed Little Albert’s participation. In addition, she received $1 for Little Albert’s participation in the experiment. In a way, she was forced to agree for participation in order to keep her job and due to aid in financial struggles. Thirdly, the â€Å"informed consent† guideline is breached as his mother was never informed about the procedure, the pros cons and withdrawal rights of the experiment. Lastly, the â€Å"desensitisation and debriefing† guideline is breached as there was no removal of ill effects and Little Albert was never treated for his fears as he left the hospital right after the experiment ended. As a result, Little Albert developed fears towards anything that was white fluffy and grown up having a phobia of dogs. Improvements There are guidelines to ensure that the â€Å"Little Albert† experiment could be run ethically. Firstly, the do no harm and desensitisation guideline could be linked together. Watson should have suggested treatment plans to help remove the harm and cause of fear of Little Albert. This is extremely crucial in protecting the participants from future psychological problems that may have a significant impact on their lives. Secondly, Watson should have chosen other babies who didn’t have parents who worked in that hospital, so that they do not feel pressured to accept the request. Also, Watson should not use money to gain agreement for participation. Lastly, Watson should have properly inform Little Albert’s mom about the experiment procedure and make it clear that he had the right to withdraw from the experiment at any time without any problems caused. Experiment 2 – Unethical The second example of past research that would be considered unethical by today’s guidelines is the â€Å"David Reimer† experiment. The experiment is conducted in 1965 at John’s Hopkins Hospital by sexologist Dr Money. The purpose of the experiment was to prove that nurture, instead of nature determines gender identity and sexual orientation. The participant was 22 month old baby, David Reimer. In the experiment, the baby underwent a sex re–assignment surgery where his testes were surgically removed. David (now Brenda) changed his name and was brought up as a female. The plan failed when his family finally revealed her original gender at age 15. First of all, the experiment has breached the â€Å"do no harm† guideline as David Reimer experienced severe psychological harm – he committed suicide at age 38. Also, the experiment has indirectly caused harm to his family: his mom was suicidal, his dad was alcoholic and his twin brother was severely depressed committed suicide at the end. Secondly, the â€Å"voluntary participation† guideline is breached as David Reimer did not volunteer for the study, his parents were equally horrified by the suggestion of a sex change, but eventually agreed to the procedure. Little did they know Dr Money’s real intention – to use David to prove his â€Å"theory of gender neutrality†, which states that gender can be trained by being brought up in an appropriate environment. Thirdly, the â€Å"informed consent† guideline is breached as his parents were not properly informed of the experiment. They were not told what was going on during the kidsâ€⠄¢ yearly meetings with Dr Money. Fourthly, the â€Å"accurate reporting† guideline is breached. Dr Money wrote a report on his study and claimed that the experiment was a huge success and that his theory is supported, which greatly contradicts the data from previous reports. It is clear that the Reimer family were having huge psychological issues – David wasn’t living up to his role as Dr Money had described in his report. Dr Money has falsified the outcome of the experiment. Lastly, the â€Å"withdrawal rights† is breached as David and his twin brother Brian were forced to travel to Baltimore for yearly meetings with Dr Money until they refused (not because they had the right to withdraw, but because they were too frightened to see him) Improvements There are guidelines to ensure that the â€Å"David Reimer† experiment could be run ethically. Firstly, Dr Money should have suggested a psychiatrist to evaluate David and provide counselling treatment to aid in his acceptance of his true gender. Dr Money should have suggested treatment centres for the Reimer family to visit to remove all negative effects caused by the hidden truth of David’s real gender. Secondly, Dr Money should have debrief the Reimer family of his real intentions of using David as an experimental object is due to selfishness, instead of persuading them to believe that a sex change is indeed the best advice that Dr Money can give. Thirdly, Dr Money should have informed David’s parents of what he did during the yearly meetings. In those meetings, he frightened the twins by using disgusting and inappropriate ways to make a clear cut difference between feminine and masculine. He made David and his twin perform sexual acts and took photos of them naked. Lastly, Dr Money should have accurately report his experiment results. Many textbooks were re-written just to publish his theory that he stated as supported, which in reality just clearly contradicts the whole experiment result when David committed suicide due to depression. Conclusion All in all, when there weren’t any ethical guidelines in the past, unethical experiments can be conducted by psychologists for selfish and illegitimate reasons. It is due to such unethical experiments that urged psychological societies to issue a code of ethics in order to protect the participants from inhumane harm. All psychologist have to strictly follow the guidelines in order to obtain approval to conduct their intended experiment. Due to the lack of guidelines in the past, Little Albert was psychologically harmed that he developed a phobia which was not treated. David Reimer was also psychologically harmed as he was not informed of his original gender until 15 years later where his whole family broke down psychologically. Previously, â€Å"she† was so confused and was often teased about her questionable gender identity, which also impacted on her self-esteem. In reality, both experiments could be run ethically even if a code of ethics was not issued in the early days. However, this is dependent on the degree of common sense and humaneness the psychologist designs the experiment. Referencing Introduces the reader to the fact that psychological research today must follow ethical guidelines. Briefly states what these guidelines are. Explains that there are examples of past research that would breach today’s guidelines. Describes an example of past research that would be considered unethical by today’s guidelines. Explains why it would be classed as unethical i.e. which guidelines are breached and how. Makes specific suggestions as to how the research could be run ethically. If this is not possible, then argues why not. Describes a second example of past research that would be considered unethical by today’s guidelines.. Explains why it would be classed as unethical i.e. which guidelines are breached and how. Makes specific suggestions as to how the second example of research could be run ethically. If this is not possible, then argues why not. Sums up main points of the essay (does not introduce any new information or ideas). Harvard in-text referencing and a full reference list is essential

World War II :: World War 2 Two

World War 11 When the World War I broke out in 1914, with Austria-Hungary declaring war on Serbia. America’s first reaction was to stay out to conflict. President Wilson, in his speech to the Congress on August 19, 1914 said: "Every man who really loves America will act and speak in the true spirit of neutrality. The United States must be neutral in fact as well as in name during these days that are to try men’s souls. We must be impartial in thought as well as in action." All American leaders favored neutrality. While the entire European continent was divided into two camps: Germany, Austria, Hungary and Turkey as Central Powers were pitted against the Allied powers: Serbia, Britain, France, Belgium, Italy and Russia. As the war progressed, American public sympathies veered to the Allied side. Under the leadership of J.P. Morgan and Company many banking firms gave huge loans to the Allied powers. By international rules the neutral country could trade with any other neutral nation and also with other ’belligerent’ countries not facing a blockade. The Americans wished to continue trade with both belligerent sides. In the initial stages of the war the British blockade of Germany created problems for the U.S. The British tried to stop all trade between Germany and the rest of the world. They extended their blockade by controlling imports to other neutral countries like Holland, Denmark and Sweden with are geographically close to Germany The Americans protested against the violation of neutral rights though Wilson never put undue pressure on England as no U.S. citizen lost his life due to the blockade. Moreover, all cargo seized was paid for at war. It was the German use of submarines in the war that brought the U.S. in direct confrontation with Germany. The German submarines fired indiscriminately at neutral ships too. The last straw was when the British passenger liner ’Lusitania’ was sunk by German submarines on May 7. It resulted in the loss of 1,200 lives which included 128 Americans. The American public was outraged. President Wilson immediately demanded compensation from Germany in a series of notes to Berlin. The tone of these notes was very crisp and harsh. Ten months after the incident, Germany apologized for the sinking and offered a compensation for the loss. But the U.S. was not satisfied. Wilson wanted to make Germany stop the use of submarines in the war.