Category: critical thinking

Essay on Opposing Views on Homelessness

The sub-topic being discussed in this essay is the social problem of homelessness. Currently. Homelessness is identified as a social problem discussed briefly in the academic book Introduction to Social Problems. In an introduction to social problems, homelessness is acknowledged as a social problem of poverty (Isaacs et al., 2014). however, homelessness may not always be associated with poverty independently (Isaacs et al., 2014). The three leading causes of homelessness identified in an introduction to social problems are demographic changes, individual circumstances such as personal issues, and structural factors that can affect an individual’s issues (Isaacs et al., 2014). Homelessness is when individuals do not have safe, stable, fixed, or inadequate housing (Housing Act 1996). Homelessness is a complex issue in society as there is not one sole reason why an individual can become homeless; numerous factors contribute to an individual becoming and experiencing homelessness. Homelessness is an important issue to discuss due to the numerous individuals experiencing this social issue. There is no official nationwide figure on how many homeless individuals are. However, in 2019 it was estimated that 280,000 individuals were classed as being homeless (Shelter, 2019). Additional explanations as to why homelessness is a critical issue to discuss are individuals who have not experienced homelessness form common-sense views surrounding homeless individuals. This essay shall discuss the social construction of homelessness, the common-sense view of homelessness, and the models such as the individualism model, the self-makings model, and the rational actor model, which all contribute to how the public perceives Homeless individuals as well as forms the common-sense view towards the homelessness, alternative perspectives on homelessness such as structural problems concerning homelessness, and what the research and evidence on homelessness provide.

Social construction preserves the details of the world as a result of the interactions of individuals within their social environment (Isaacs et al., 2014). The social construction of homelessness is primarily perceived by how individuals in society witness homelessness. Currently, rough sleeping is considered the most visible type of homelessness (Reeve, 2011). However, homelessness is much more diverse than rough sleepers, as most of the homelessness are hidden away from society and are not as visible as rough sleeping. This causes the social construction of homelessness to be formed by rough sleepers leading to the social construction of homelessness in which all homeless individuals are rough sleepers. Individuals also suggest that homelessness results from personal defects, such as substance abuse (Cronley, 2010), causing another social construction of homelessness that homelessness occurs due to substance abuse or homelessness individuals have addictions to substances. Socioeconomic and political transformations can also contribute to the social construction of homelessness (Robertson and Greenblatt, 1992).

How the homelessness sector and the media portray homelessness directly impacts public knowledge and perspectives on the problem (Crisis, 2018), which causes numerous individuals to have a common-sense view of homelessness. Often, when individuals get requested to assume an image of someone encountering homelessness, an image of an individual lying intoxicated on the pavement or a desperate-looking individual requesting money on the streets (Isaacs et al., 2014) forms in their minds. Even though multiple individuals have witnessed individuals like this in society, these experiences are far from the reality of what homelessness means to the individual in that position (Isaacs et al., 2014). As rough sleeping is the primary homelessness that is most visible and noticed by society, numerous individuals associate rough sleeping with homelessness. This form of homelessness witnessed by society assembles one of the common-sense views toward homelessness: every homeless individual is a rough sleeper and resides on the streets. However, rough sleeping is only a tiny part of the social problem of homelessness (Isaacs et al., 2014), and many individuals experiencing homelessness are hidden from the public view (Crisis, 2018). The public correlates homelessness with individuals residing on the streets and the absence of not having a place to live (Crisis, 2018). This combination causes individuals to articulate extremely negative emotions about homelessness (Crisis, 2018). This view of homelessness is problematic in society because it misrepresents the full range of homelessness and blocks understanding of other forms of homelessness (Crisis, 2018). The individualism model can also contribute common-sense view of homelessness that individuals in society have. Individualism is a model which enormously affects how the public thinks. It forms how individuals perceive the reasons and repercussions of homelessness (Crisis, 2018). In this model, individuals witness the reasons for homelessness through a lens that examines individual characters and situations (Crisis, 2018). From this, individuals view the primary explanations for homelessness as individual choices and circumstances such as addiction to drugs and alcohol (Crisis, 2018). The self-makings model believes that individuals make and determine their choices (Crisis, 2018). According to this model, all individuals can acquire success; people who experience homelessness have failed to work hard and grasp those opportunities (Crisis, 2018). This model forms the common-sense view that individuals attribute success or failure to whether a person has tried hard enough or not and forms another common-sense view that individuals are homeless because individuals choose behaviors that lead to the loss of housing (Crisis, 2018). The rational actor model also contributes to the common-sense views individuals in society have of individuals experiencing homelessness. This model displays that numerous homeless people have concluded that homelessness is more suitable than conforming to society’s responsibilities, norms, and expectations (Crisis, 2018). Therefore this assembles the common-sense view that homelessness is a judgment made by an individual to bypass the expenditures of family life, participation in the employment market, or social responsibilities (Crisis, 2018).

There are alternative perspectives regarding homelessness. As rough sleeping is the most visible and tends to be what individuals in society believe homelessness to be, other classifications of homelessness are not visible to society. They have higher rates of individuals experiencing them. There are no official statistics on how many individuals are rough sleeping; however, it was estimated that 2,688 individuals were known to be sleeping rough on the streets in one night (The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, 2021) compared to the estimation of hidden homeless individuals living situations which frequently involve sofa surfing, squatting, or sleeping on public transport and that 12,500 people will be hidden homeless on any night in, with 60,000 household’s sofa surfing (London Assembly Housing Committee, 2017) and in 2021 96,060 households were living in temporary accommodation (Wilson and Barton, 2022). This evidence shows that more individuals are sofa surfing, squatting, sleeping on public transport, and living in temporary accommodation than homeless individuals living on the streets as rough sleepers. Demographic changes are another perspective on why individuals are experiencing homelessness. For example, alone, the population has gone up by 20 percent since the mid-1990s (Isaacs et al., 2014); this growth has materialized due to external migration and an increasingly more senior population and internal domestics (Isaacs et al., 2014). These trends can put increased pressure on housing (Isaacs et al., 2014). Government policies are also an alternative perspective as to why homelessness occurs. From the late 1970s to the early 1990s, there was a political conclusion to reduce investment in social housing and sell existing housing by allowing social housing tenants the right to buy their homes (Isaacs et al., 2014). This conclusion took away thousands of social housing homes from the public sector and was never replaced (Isaacs et al., 2014). An additional perspective on homelessness is the structural problems that are causing homelessness. Structural factors can include unfavorable housing, rising poverty rates, and the welfare and benefits system (Alma Economics, 2019). The present rate of houses required to be constructed to fulfill the existing and expected demand of individuals requiring them is around half the level they need to be at (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2015). This shortfall in the supply of new homes is one factor that contributes to rising house prices (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2015) Rising rent prices of homes are rising, and data has suggested that private rent price increases are averaging around 2% a year since 2007 (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2015). Changes to the benefits system have also been responsible for homelessness. The benefits system has become much more brutal, with more suspensions, sanctions, and exclusions (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2015). These changes impact individuals and leave them without enough income to afford their rent, causing them to be homeless. Benefit caps have also been introduced by the government (Homeless Link, 2021), causing individuals who are on benefits to be only able to claim a set amount of money for housing costs. Individuals claiming housing elements as part of their benefits are likely to be renting a property that costs more than their benefit housing element (Homeless Link, 2021). The failure of the government to cover housing costs pushes people into rent arrears (Homeless Link, 2021), causing individuals to be unable to meet the rent arrears, therefore, leading them to lose their homes and become homeless.

When examining the recent research and evidence on homelessness, economic factors are one of the foremost contributors to homelessness rates. One of ‘s primary homeless monitors, written by crisis, discusses and evaluates yearly statistics and estimations on the homeless. Overall, homelessness is increasing substantially (Fitzpatrick et al., 2019). The statutory homelessness caseload for local authorities has declined; however, it remains 42 percent above its low point in 2009 (Fitzpatrick et al., 2019). Homelessness temporary accommodation has increased by 71 percent (Fitzpatrick et al., 2019). In 2018 Eighty-five thousand homeless households were found to be living in temporary accommodation, equating to over 200,000 people (Fitzpatrick et al., 2019). Official estimates suggest that rough sleeping has fallen by 2 percent nationally; however, there are still ascending trends of rough sleepers in three of’s four central regions, Manchester and Birmingham (Fitzpatrick et al., 2019). For example, in rough sleeping has risen by 25% in 12 months (Fitzpatrick et al., 2019). This data suggests that homelessness is increasing overall. Even though the proportion of rough sleeping and statutory homeless individuals has decreased, other classifications of homelessness, such as individuals living in temporary accommodation, are on the rise. The factors that are most strongly associated with these rising trends of homelessness are economic factors. Unemployment rates are at 4 percent, which is the lowest recorded rate since the mid-1970s (Fitzpatrick et al., 2019). Poverty rates are essential in establishing the context in which homelessness transpires (Fitzpatrick et al., 2019). Increased poverty levels are expected to place more households at risk of homelessness, especially when housing costs are involved (Fitzpatrick et al., 2019). Entrance to homeownership has become increasingly challenging since the late 1990s as house prices have increased faster than incomes from employment (Fitzpatrick et al., 2019). Access to affordable and socially rented housing has been more challenging (Fitzpatrick et al., 2019). Social housing is continuing to decrease. In 2018, less than 18,000 social lets were given to homeless households and individuals, even with statutory homelessness increasing substantially (Fitzpatrick et al., 2019). Sixty-four percent of local authorities informed the crisis that when social landlords require financial capability or housing affordability checks, these make it increasingly complicated for homeless households to gain tenancies (Fitzpatrick et al., 2019). This data suggests that the economic factors discussed above contribute to the trends in homelessness rates. Local housing allowance reforms, benefit cuts, and universal credit for the new welfare system are also likely to hold particular importance for homelessness (Fitzpatrick et al., 2019).

Homelessness is a complex issue to discuss due to the numerous factors that can generate it, such as policies, individual circumstances, and structural issues. The evidence and statistics on homelessness and the evidence-based factors contributing to and causing individuals to become homeless indicate that homelessness is a much more significant problem. Currently, statistical evidence is primarily estimated, which shows there may be more individuals experiencing homelessness than the total number in estimations. In summary, the social construction of homelessness is that homeless individuals are perceived by how homeless individuals are witnessed in society, with rough sleepers at the forefront; however, many more individuals experiencing homelessness aren’t solely rough sleepers. The social construction of homelessness connects with the common-sense view of homelessness that individuals are homeless due to substance abuse or because they choose to be, as well as the influence of the media and the public models, on individuals who hold the common-sense view of homelessness, which contributes to the negative stereotypes a homelessness individual has placed on them and perceived by individuals in society. From examining the evidence on homelessness, some classifications of homelessness are decreasing however other classifications are continuing to rise and economic factors are contributing to the rising trends.

Hope and Glory’ Analysis Essay

Critique of the article “Hope and Glory: An expanded social strategy diagnosis model to incorporate corporate social responsibility within business strategy”

This article was composed by a group of authors, i.e., Andreia Areal, Bryan McIntosh, and Bruce Sheppy, all are sincere and truthful professionals. Andreia Areal is a Lecturer at the Faculty of Business and Economics at Richmond University and other private higher education institutes. She has substantial experience in legal practice administration, as well as non-profit and private health and fitness organizations. She has recently switched her career to become an academic trainer specializing in strategy, marketing, and corporate social responsibility. Bryan McIntosh is an Associate Dean at the Faculty of Health Studies and University of Bradford. He has worked with the central government, NHS, local government, and several academic institutions. He has a long list of publications in peer-reviewed journals and substantial experience in the field of health management consulting. Bruce Sheppy is a successful Senior Health Management Professional who has held positions as Group Marketing Director of a South African hospital group listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange and CEO of a pan-African medical insurance and health management company with offices in Egypt, Tanzania, Kenya, Ghana, and Rwanda He has a long list of peer-reviewed journal publications and serves on the editorial board of a top healthcare management journal as well as being a director of an environmental management and sustainability organization.

This paper attempts to explain whether CSR may be a strategic tool for companies in India to get a competitive advantage by addressing the complexity of the conceptualization of strategy and CSR. The prescriptive and emergent views of corporate strategy, as well as the profit maximization versus processual argument, will be discussed in this paper, with an emphasis on alternative models of social responsibility: in particular, the bottom of the pyramid and the production of shared value (CSV). The goal of this paper is to fill a gap in the literature by developing a diagnostic model based on Whittington’s general viewpoints on strategy to support the anecdotal assumption that CSR can be matched with business practices.

The argument over corporate social responsibility (CSR) has a long history in academia. The authors couldn’t agree on what CSR is and how much value it brings to businesses. Divergent scholarly viewpoints on diverse approaches to strategy formation exist, and the issue of shareholder value versus stakeholder responsibility has been extensively debated.

India, Asia’s third-largest economy, grew by 7.4% in 2014, according to the World Bank, and is expected to contribute 6% to 11% of global GDP by 2025. However, according to the World Development Indicators, 21.9 percent of India’s population lives below the national poverty threshold.

From the foregoing analysis, it is clear that CSR has strategic potential that has yet to be realized. The paper started with a discussion of Whittington’s generic strategy model from an Indian perspective on strategy formulation. The study report examined the issue of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and its lack of strategic emphasis. The notion is that when it comes to CSR, an enlarged strategy model should be explored, and the bottom of the pyramid and CSV concepts should be regarded as alternative models of strategic intent toward social responsibility.

Rogerian Argument Essay about Technology

Introduction

Humans are obsessed with technology. The fact that there are more people with mobile phones (5.1 billion) than people with toothbrushes (4.2 billion) (according to Hubspot) shows how much we love technology.

Those statistics do not surprise me. Technology is not going anywhere. Technology is not an option. It is a fundamental part of our life. It simplified our life. It made the earth a smaller place.

There is no argument against “Has technology made our life more comfortable?”. Without digital technology and digital tools, I may not be able to study at the university, especially with the current circumstances surrounding COVID-19. It is fascinating how technology helped us to adapt to a new world of social distancing.

I remember in my younger years how taking a photo was painful. First, you have to have a bulky camera. And you can’t guarantee the quality of the photos. You just have to wait until the film is developed at the camera shop.

And what about listening to music? Those cassette tapes and their terrible sound qualities and how easily they damage and break.

Another example is making a phone call. Imagine a world with no mobile phone. I can’t even imagine living without my mobile phone for a few hours.

And can we imagine going back in time before the invention of the automobile? The comfort of traveling around so quickly and leisure has become an aspect of our modern life.

Those are just a few examples of how technology made our lives easier.

Has technology made our lives more comfortable?

Forty-five years ago Bill Gates and Paul Allen founded Microsoft. They had the bold idea of a computer on every desk and in every home (CNN Business ).

A lot of people thought they were crazy and out of their minds and it was impossible to achieve their vision.

But today, I look around in my house and there is a laptop for every family member. The number of laptops and computers is more than family members.

But what are the conveniences that we get from owning a computer? I use my laptop daily to do my master’s degree and study, to connect with friends and family via emails and video chat, to browse the internet, to find new recipes on YouTube, and to upload personal photos to our cloud storage. These activities would be impossible to achieve without having the technology. I can chat with any person in any country around the world any time I want. I can buy items from overseas that do not exist in my local shopping center. I can read the news, watch kitten videos, and like celebrity posts on Instagram. I can do all that without leaving my bedroom.

Someone said, “Modern problems require modern solutions”. We live in a modern world and our problems are evolving at the same rate with technology. I will give an example. One of our cats is a compulsive overeating cat. She always steals the other cat’s food. Recently we’ve been advised by the vet to put her on a weight loss program. It was hard to prevent her from stealing the food. After researching the matter, we found out there is a device called Microchip Pet Feeder. It is designed for multi-pet households to ensure that pets are unable to steal from others. The feeder uses revolutionary technology to read the cat microchip and open the food bowl to the right pet only. We bought two feeders, one for each cat. It took a few days to get the cats to be comfortable to use it but it solved the issue with stealing food. The problem with household pets may seem trivial but it is amazing how technology and innovation can be useful in those trivial situations.

In the past, talking to electronic devices was something out of Sci-Fi movies and shows such as Star Trek or R2D2 in Star Wars. But now we have Alexa sitting right on the shelf in our living room waiting for our commands.

Voice recognition devices are everywhere nowadays. Recently, Amazon Alexa (simply known as Alexa) has been added to our household gadgets. It is the virtual assistant AI (Wikipedia) capable of voice interaction with us. We can ask Alexa all sorts of questions. Rather than using the browser to search for answers I simply say “Alexa what is 360 Fahrenheit in Celsius?” or “What is 2800 divided by 9” or “Alexa what is the temperature today?”.

We can stream music, ask math questions, ask her to tell us jokes, play audiobooks, weather temperature, traffic status in certain areas before traveling, and so on.

Amazon Alexa, Apple Siri, and Google Assistant are human new smart devices. They are in homes, offices, hotels, cars. They are everywhere.

According to Daria Evdokimova, CEO & Co-founder of VoiceOps

“In the next 5-10 years, it’s highly unlikely machine-driven speech-to-text won’t surpass human transcription in both accuracy and speed, just given the current pace of development. We’re not there yet, but we will be shortly. That speed of development will also increase over the next few years as we continue to capture more voice data through in-home and mobile virtual assistant apps like Siri and Alexa.”

The journey of Virtual Assistant AI is just at the beginning. We are still far from seeing the real potential of this technology in our world.

One aspect of modern technology is called Deep Learning. Machines can learn new features from raw information or inputs. We already experience the outcome of this technology with self-driving cars or autonomous vehicles. Those vehicles will revolutionize how people use their cars shortly. They are supposed to operate fully without the interaction of humans. The concept of autonomous cars might seem dangerous to some people. The technology is still in progress and those new types of cars are still not ready to be operating on our roads. But I am sure soon we will start to see them on the road.

Imagine you own a self-driving car, the car will drive you to the train station or work in the morning and it drive itself back home and park itself in the garage. How fantastic is that? Who needs to find parking in some backstreet near the station or work?

Your smart self-driving car could generate income for you while you are not using it by working as a taxi for other commuters. I like to drive my car and I enjoy long drives. But when I am over 70 I think self-driving cars will add extra comfort and independence to my life.

Our reliance on technology can be found in every corner of our world. Inside and outside our homes.

We enjoyed listening to the radio stations while we drove our cars. We extended our life expectancy with all the modern medical equipment and medicine. And where would we be without the television? Every night we have dinner while we watch our favorite shows on Netflix or Prime or Stan. And how can I travel without airplanes? We can be on the other side of the world within a few hours instead of a few months. How is that not comfort?

Imagine life without a laptop, mobile phone, car, electricity, medicine, microwave oven, fridge, washing machine, dishwasher, lava lamp, MRI scanner, vaccines, air conditioning, clocks, vacuum cleaners, heaters, lights, and bikes.

I feel like I am privileged to be living in a time of advanced technology. I can only hope that I can witness more futuristic technological inventions such as space tourism, robot butlers, flying cars, and lab-grown meat.

I also hope that humans will start to use technology in favor of the environment, not against it. I hope technology can help us clean the ocean from plastic, recycle our waste, save wildlife from extinction, provide clean water, fix climate changes, generate renewable energy, and build smart homes.

There is no doubt that technology has a great influence on humanity. From the beginning of the 20th century till now technology has influenced us in both positive and negative ways. There are a lot of technologies that have negative effects on the environment and our lives such as the evil single-use plastic. While it contributes to the comfort of our daily living especially at the shopping centre, it also destroys our planet and contributes to the death of our oceans. According to Onyalife, only 9% of the plastic we manufacture makes it to recycling facilities around the world. The rest is dumped in our water or landfill.

More examples of evil or useless technologies are nuclear weapons, face recognition, Microsoft Office assistant Clippy, Facebook, asbestos, and many others.

However eco-friendly technologies such as solar power, LED lighting, and biodegradable plastic are becoming more and more household items.

Last but not least, technology is the result of our thinking and our desire to invent. We can’t eliminate technology from our life. It is what makes humans superior creatures among other living creatures on this planet. Technology can kill millions with nuclear bombs or light our houses with electricity. It is our choice to use it for good or bad.

Conclusion

All sorts of technologies are embedded in many aspects of our world.

Being not able to use technology or having no access to technologies such as computers, the internet, automobiles, and mobile phones because of age or location is considered a big disadvantage these days.

Technology can mitigate a lot of our daily life struggles such as banking, shopping, social isolation, health and well-being, and more.

Digital technologies are considered basic human rights such as the internet, not just a comfort tool.

The argument that technology has not made our lives more comfortable is baseless. Most of us blame technology when it comes to social and mental health. I hear phrases such as “Social media is ruining our lives” “We became addicted to technology” “Wireless devices making us sick” or “5G network is spreading coronavirus”.

All these negative attitudes toward technology are the result of us not knowing how to use technology in our daily lives, not because of technology itself. Also, many of us have deep worries about the impact of emerging technologies on our lives.

I see technology as empowerment for our world. We can’t take technology out of our life. We can’t go back to the time before the industrial revolution. Technology will continue to evolve to cater to our needs and make our life more easy to live.

References

1. Hopkins, J., 2020. 9 Amazing Mobile Marketing Statistics Every Marketer Should Know. [online] Blog.hubspot.com. Available at: [Accessed 2 August 2020].
2. Bae, H., 2020. Bill Gates Emails Microsoft Employees To Celebrate Company’s 40Th Anniversary. [online] CNNMoney. Available at: [Accessed 2 August 2020].
3. En.wikipedia.org. 2020. Amazon Alexa. [online] Available at: [Accessed 2 August 2020].
4. Future of Everything. 2020. What’s The Future Of Voice Recognition? |. [online] Available at: [Accessed 2 August 2020].
5. Czaja, S., Charness, N., Fisk, A., Hertzog, C., Nair, S., Rogers, W. and Sharit, J., 2006. Factors predicting the use of technology: Findings from the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (create). Psychology and Aging, 21(2), pp.333-352.
6. Onya Australia. 2020. 48 Eco-Friendly Products To Buy Today To Stop Plastic Waste Australia. [online] Available at: [Accessed 3 August 2020].

Discourse Community about Marketing Essay

Should people be able to pay to get to the head of the line in public facilities, such as airports? To drive alone in carpool lanes for a fee? Or to quit smoking or lose weight? Should having money determine who gets first access to emergency rooms or transplants for kidneys? Does everything in life have a price tag on it? This is a very provocative concept, as our society continues to modernize and advance, money seems to become the answer to all our problems. Money has helped our society thrive and get us to where we are today, but it’s now to the point where someone can buy themselves through life. Life is beyond our earnings and there needs to be a sense of morality when it comes to putting a price tag on particular things.

I watched a video of Michael Sandel, where he discussed his book, What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets. He elaborated on what’s happened once we’ve shifted from having a market economy into a market society. A market society is where almost everything is up for sale, and eventually becomes a way of our everyday life, such as our family, personal relations, health, education, civic life, and/or politics. The first problem with more things being up for sale is there’s more hardship that is faced by the poor. If all inequality meant was the rich having a nice car or going on vacation inequality wouldn’t be as suffering, but putting a price tag on everything makes it more and more difficult to be poor. Money governs access in our world today such as the location you live, if you can send your kids to a good school or a not-very-good school, or even what political voice you’re capable of having (Sandel 2013). The more life is commodified, the how much money someone has will unequally let them thrive more than they would otherwise, while at the same time holding back the people without as much money (Sandel 2013). The second reason to worry about becoming a market society is the tendency to crowd out or erode non-market values that are worth caring about. One of the examples Sandel gave exploring this concept was the policies that enable people to buy and sell certain kinds of quotas. He talked about how during the Civil War there was an advertisement for money to take a person’s place after being drafted to fight. In terms of economic reasoning, both parties are better off. This transaction is worth it for the person hiring the substitute (for obvious reasons) and financially worth it for the person who agreed to serve in his place, but this is a pretty controversial topic on whether that’s morally right or wrong. Sandel went on to talk about how we can’t pay someone to go into jury duty for us, or we aren’t allowed to buy people’s votes from them; he proceeded to say that if when we think there’s a civic duty, naturally there will be hesitation in allowing people to sell off or hire other people to fulfill specific duties that have some other higher value at stake.

Sandel also discussed two implications for the way we do economics that need to be considered. Economists often assume markets as being inert; they don’t taint, touch, or change the goods, they exchange them. In regards to material goods like flat-screen TVs, this is true. Depending on whether there is a market relationship, if you sell a flat-screen TV or get it as a gift, it will work the same either way and the value of the TV won’t vary (Sandel 2013). The same isn’t true when we’re talking about health, education, environment, respect for the community, cultures of people, civic duties, etc., in cases like these subjecting social practices to market valuation and exchange may change their meaning and character of the goods (Sandel 2013). This may happen by crowding out market values, and norm attitudes worth caring about. Then to decide where markets belong and where they don’t, it’s not enough to engage in economics as if it were a value-neutral science in choice (Sandel 2013). Economics has presented itself since the early 20th century as a value-neutral science of choice, but market reasoning and market practices crowd out values, nonmarket goods, and norm attitudes (Sandel 2013). We have to question in any given instance where we would use a market mechanism, what are the goods at stake in the practice, and whether they are civic, cultural, environmental, or communal goods. Also, we have to ask will marketizing these goods drive them out or diminish/erode them? This is a big implication for economics, which has to reconnect with its origins in political and moral philosophy. Classic economists such as Adam Smith and Karl Marx understood economics as a subfield of moral and political philosophy (Sandel 2013). As the influence of markets increases in the spheres of our social life, that moral philosophy branch needs to be reconnected back to economics. Another consequence of marketizing goods that drive out certain attitudes and norms worth caring about is our public discourse has become empty of larger meaning. Politics have become narrowly mannered and technocratic with constant arguing on cable TV, talk radio, and the floor of Congress (Sandel 2013). Many people suspect this is because too many people believe too deeply in their moral conviction, Sandel thinks that it’s the opposite, the reason the public discourse is so impoverished is that it fails to engage with larger questions, like how to value goods the social goods embodied in the practices from health to education to environment to civic life, etc. We can’t just shy away from engaging directly in arguments about the meaning of goods in public life. The reason we are so commonly avoiding these issues is these are controversial judgments people disagree about and then we reach for a public discourse that’s empty of these big questions (Sandel 2013). The rise of market reasoning is a part of the appeal of market reasoning and it seems to offer a value-neutral way to make social choices that seems to spare the need to engage in the debate about the character of goods (Sandel 2013). This is a false promise because it’s led to the hollowing out and emptiness of public discourse. This could be an explanation of why citizens of democracies around the world are frustrated to reconnect with big questions regarding public discourse about economics (Sandel 2013). It’s the only way we will be able to decide in a democratic society where the market serves the public good and where they don’t belong. Engaging with big things that don’t involve technocratic or managerial talk is another way to elevate the terms of our public discourse (Sandel 2013). Everyone doesn’t have to agree that we have a morally more robust kind of public discourse, but to make this democracy better, we will have to cultivate habits of listening and learning from one another even when disagreements persist (Sandel 2013). We may develop a keener sense of the price we pay for drifting towards a society where everything is up for sale.

I believe there should be moral limits on the market. Shifting from a market economy into a market society hurts society. The poor will continue to fall further back, and the inequality gap will continue to grow when things beyond market goods have a price tag on them. There’s also a tendency to erode or crowd out nonmarket values that are worth caring about. Policies that enable people to buy and sell certain kinds of quotas are very controversial and these should be addressed and put a limit on. Economists need to reconnect with moral and political philosophy as classical economists did so. Markets aren’t inert when talking about non-market goods such as health, education, environment, cultures of people, civic duties, and respect for the community. We can’t subject these social practices to market valuation and exchange them because they change their meaning and the character of the good. There also needs to be a larger question on the meaning of our moral purpose which includes questions about how to value social goods from health, education, and environment to civic life. We need to address the big question about the character of goods and move away from a society where everything is for sale.

Essay on Oedipus Prophecy

A man who blinded himself and ran off from his city, Oedipus, a man whose identification he no longer knew. He killed his father and married his mother, unknowingly stunning a prophecy. This is a story of a man written by way of the capability of the Greek Tragedian Sophocles and using the skill of way of Professor Elmer Rufo at the University of the Philippines Los Banos from September 14, 2006, to September 15, 2006.

The play starts offevolved with the imparting of what is taking area to Oedipus’ cherished city, Thebes. Oedipus consoled his people; Creon (Oedipus’ brother-in-law) knowledgeable them that the answer was discovering the assassin of the late king Laius, former king of Thebes. In investigating the murder, Oedipus talks about himself and the crime he has committed. Queen Locaste (Oedipus’ mom and later wife) killed herself in agony and Oedipus blinded himself, obtained away from Thebes, and lived in exile.

While inspecting or looking at Oedipus Rex, human beings may additionally be wondered, amazed, or extraordinarily puzzled. Oedipus Rex as written through the way of Sophocles is a challenging and hard-to-understood play. Sophocles can also additionally remain extended ago, write extended ago, and agree with in a precise way in contrast to us, however, his play has traversed time, surviving years, and withstood many criticisms. In the time of Sophocles, human beings in his unique vicinity relied on the gods to dominate them and they (the people) were fully toys played with the aid of way of using way of the gods, in other words, gods are ideal high-qual to man. The Oedipus Rex renowned the supremacy of the gods, via the capability of showing, that defiance to the divine may additionally bring afflictions; like in the case of King Laius and Queen Locaste, they desired to defy the divine prophecy, that their son would kill his father and marry his mother, through the way of commanding their servant to left the toddler to a mountain; Oedipus additionally desire to defy the divine through taking walks away from his considered mother and father so that the prophecy would perhaps moreover now no longer be fulfilled. The supremacy of the gods used to be set up in the success of the divine prophecy.

The thinking of the future used to be as quickly validated in Oedipus Rex; the future is irrevocable and cannot be changed. Wisdom in struggling used to be moreover shown, like when Oedipus exiled himself from Thebes due to the truth it was right for him and because used to be what he laid formerly than him. Humility used to be moreover demonstrated in the play; the lack of humility of Oedipus introduced him to his downfall. In Oedipus Rex, we see the conflict between free will and determinism. The story concluded that what is determined will constantly happen.

Forgiveness as a Theme in Literature and Movies Essay

Forgiveness and loss an important themes in everyone’s life. It helps people to endure a challenge of hardship or to overcome a fear that they must be able to face in the future. For instance, Don Hall and Chris Williams’s film produced in 2014, Big Hero 6, conveys how important forgiveness and loss are throughout out the film. As a young robotics prodigy, Hiro forms a superhero team to fight against an evil villain named Professor Callaghan. “Loss” is an important theme. The main character Hiro, loses his brother in a fire. “Forgiveness is another significant theme as the main character Hiro must grow as a person and save the city until he forgives Professor Callaghan for being the reason why his brother Tadashi. Therefore forgiveness and loss are illustrated throughout the film with many different film techniques and many unique features to give the audience a better understanding of the hardship that Hiro and his friends must face to explore the themes and engage the audience.

The theme of “forgiveness” is portrayed throughout the movie Big Hero 6. Forgiveness is explored. For example when Hiro confronts Professor Callaghan that “Abagel will not come back” Professor Callaghan thinks about letting Krei go. The medium shot conveys the position of the character, Krei in the background being held captive by Professor Callaghan. We also see Professor Callaghan’s facial expressions, thinking about whether to let him go or not, making the audience feel sympatric over Krei as he is being held captive. Moreover another example of “forgiveness” is when Hiro realizes that Professor Callaghan’s daughter is still alive hyper-sleeping. Hiro decides to save her or not. As Hiro is about to go into the portal Krei tries to stop Hiro from going in as it is too dangerous for Hiro. Hiro replies “She’s still alive, I have to save her.” This medium shot portrays Hiro’s facial expression as puzzled and very shocked. It also shows us how he has put himself in big danger, and will continue to do so in the future to save Professor Callaghan’s daughter, explaining to the audience how Hiro shows a get abundance of forgiveness. Furthermore, after moments of thinking decides to save her with Baymax’s help. The long shot used highlights the determination of Hiro and Baymax to save Abigail. What Hiro is doing conveys extreme forgiveness as he is willing to risk his life to save Abigail, the daughter of Professor Callaghan, who is the reason why his brother Tadashi is dead in the first place, explain how “forgiveness is conveyed throughout the film.

The theme “loss” is a significant theme throughout the film and engages the audience in many different ways, through a variety of film techniques and features. Many characters in the film Big Hero 6 experience loss. Specifically, the main character Hiro has experienced abundant loss in his life and must endure this hardship, battling against the grief to get on with his life. Hiro’s first experience of loss is when his brother Tadashi is killed in a fire at the University. A wide angle shot angle and eye level shot illustrate Hiro running towards the building to help his brother Tadashi before it explodes. This explains to the audience Tadashi has been killed in the film. The non-diegetic sounds of very intense and suspenseful background music, convey how something terrible has happened, making the audience pity Hiro. Moreover, another example used to explore the theme of “loss” is when crowds of people mourn the death of Tadashi with their black umbrellas as it is also raining. The close-up shot and the non-diegetic noise of depressing music portray that people are saddened over the horrible incident of Tadashi’s death, making the audience feel sad for the crowd over the bad incident. Furthermore, loss is highlighted when Hiro is by himself sitting on top of the stairs, not wanting to go down to mourn with his family and friends, because of Tadashi’s death. The high-angle panning shot and non-diegetic sounds of piano keys play a saddened background noise, filled with dull colors. Portrays how Hiro has been affected by his brother’s recent death, as Hiro feels down and sad about himself with the fact that Tadashi is not there anymore, making the Audience feel gloomy towards Hiro as he must endure this hardship to move on with his life, explaining how the film includes the important theme of loss in Big Hero 6.

Therefore film techniques and features are used in many interesting ways to engage the audience, The theme of “forgiveness” and “loss” helps Hiro overcome the hardship of the death of his brother Tadashi, making Hiro much stronger and braver as a person. This conveys how “forgiveness” and “loss” is involved in the film “Big Hero 6”

Essay on Definition of Reaping in ‘The Hunger Games’

The Hunger Games is a dystopian fictional novel by Suzanne Collins. The novel depicts an unequal world within which Panem and the citizens are troubled by the oppressive Capitol regime. The power of authority overcomes any others. Inequality is heavily present throughout the novel, both, in and out of the games. The Capitol holds influence and power over the other districts and is thus dominating in Panem. The main distinction in the novel is wealth- wealthier classes compared to poorer ones. Collins presents us with an unfair reaping system which is how tributes for the Hunger Games are selected. Inequality is also presented through the tributes- some tributes come trained for the games and thus have an advantage over others. Other disadvantages are also in terms of appearances and jobs. Regardless of the circumstances, Collins always highlights prejudice in situations. Effie says, “May the odds be ever in your favor”, but in Panem, wealth decides your odds.

The tesserae system is extremely unfair. The tesserae system helps decide who participates in the Hunger Games- a fight to the death. The tributes are chosen at a reaping which is held in the square. The reaping is also an opportunity for the Capitol to ‘keep tabs on the population’. Hypothetically, the system is fair, as everybody has an equal chance to be chosen for the games or so it is said. The poorer people in District 12 use tesserae- which are portions of meals and oils, to have their name entered in the reaping more times. It is their only chance at surviving. Richer households do not require tesserae and as a result, have their name entered less times. Gale has to face similar injustice during the reaping. When talking to Madge, he gets furious about how unjust and

corrupt the system is, as he had ‘six entries at the age of twelve’, whereas Madge was fortunate enough to be born into a wealthy family which means she does not require tesserae to survive. Even though the system is unfair and nobody can control how it works, ‘It’s just the way it is’ and the system cannot be changed- the injustice will always remain within Panem. The ‘reaping system is unfair’ in the age selection process too. ‘You become eligible for the reaping the day you turn twelve’- kids are qualified to participate in the Hunger Games rather than adults- who have a higher chance at winning. The Capitol only chooses kids to participate in the deadly games because they want Panem to feel powerless against them and understand how they are still in their clutch. Therefore, regardless of how the reaping system is displayed as random, the reality is that the poorer are more likely to be chosen and so are kids rather than adults because the reaping is only eligible for kids from 12-18… this shows the Capitol’s power and that kids die hopelessly for the sole purpose of entertainment but also injustice and sacrifice by having to follow rules and give up your life against your will.

The accolades from the wealthier regions have a benefit over those from other, more unfortunate areas. Also, the wealthy who do become accolades will, in general, have a further favorable position since they have been ‘trained their whole lives’ for the games and later, volunteer to attempt to win them. Even though ‘it’s technically against the rules to train tributes before they reach the Capitol’ regardless, ‘it happens every year’. These trained tributes are referred to as ‘Career Tributes’ or ‘Careers’, ‘as like as not, the winner will be one of them’. They are ‘the exceptions [are the kids] from wealthier districts, the volunteers’. They come from Districts ‘1, 2, and 4’ and ‘traditionally have

this look about them’. They are stronger, and better prepared for the tribulations of the Hunger Games, there are ‘boys who are three times [my] size’ and ‘girls who know twenty different ways to kill you with a knife’. They have a considerably greater advantage than the poor tributes who were selected accidentally. They are consequently more likely to survive. It is an honor for Career Tributes to participate in the Hunger Games, while for the tributes from the poorer districts, it is essentially a death sentence. Thus, regardless of the rules or the circumstances- the wealthier always have an upper hand over the poor, this is a display of bias because it proves that some districts are in no position to win the games whereas other, richer districts are built for this.

In Panem, wealth is vigorously engaged within the hands of the affluent, outstandingly those living in

the Capitol and a portion of the richer districts, like Districts 1,2, and 3, and thus it brings about a gigantic disparity between their lives, creating a detachment and differentiation between the rich and the poor in the novel. This disparity uncovers itself in changed manners all through the novel, anyway among the eminent are food, occupations, and appearances. Inside the helpless regions, a few of the occupants need more to eat. Katniss notes that ‘dying of starvation is a common cause’ in District 12, moreover, she needs to hunt wrongfully inside the forested areas to take care of and uphold her family. Disparity likewise appeared in occupations in District 12 ‘men and women with

hunched shoulders, and swollen knuckles, many of whom have long since stopped trying to scrub the coal dust out of their broken nails and lines on their sunken faces’ work all day and show exertion in their activity however are scarcely granted, also, their diseases are left unbothered and they don’t tidy themselves up. While ‘they do surgery in the Capitol, to make people look younger and thinner’ because appearance is what’s concentrated on in the Capitol. In District 12, ‘looking old is something of an achievement since so many people die early’ chiefly due to working in the mines. This builds up the establishment of contrast between the rich and the destitute in Panem, with the center concentrated on the wealthier and no help given to the helpless which brings about making an unmistakable distinction in social classes.

Throughout The Hunger Games, inequality is consistently displayed. Likewise, Collins highlights the difference in ages, and how the reaping system is unfair by leaning an advantage towards the wealthier- the chances are never even. Suzanne Collins also shows us how money can cheat the law, rules, and the system- the Career Tributes are at an advantage due to their trained background, and the rules are exempted for them. Correspondingly, there is inequality between the classes which leads to an imbalance in jobs, food, and appearances. Citizens of the Capitol live a luxurious life whereas people of District 12 live in austerity. In conclusion, in Panem, wealth decides your fate.

Expository Essay about Forgiveness as a Strength

The knowledge of one’s worthiness is crucial to a person’s ability to feel a sense of love and connection. In 2010, Brene Brown did a TED talk on how impactful being vulnerable is to our ability to feel belonging and connection which received over 40.5 million views. She explains that the soul of her work as a researcher is to study, predict, and control phenomena, but through her research, she discovered that the best way to live is to cease predicting and controlling and get comfortable with vulnerability. This revelation caused a life-changing breakdown for Brown, triggering her pursuit of learning to live whole-heartedly and vulnerable. She found that to feel vulnerable is what it means to be alive and gives us the ability to create, belong, and love.

The main factor that keeps us from feeling connected to those around us is a fear that maybe we do not deserve that connection. We are all afraid that there is a quality we unfortunately have that makes us not good enough, but we must learn to embrace our imperfections. Some may find it easier to feel self-worth than others. For those on the hunt for higher life satisfaction, many options can help such as therapy and understanding positive psychology. The key to discovering the feeling of self-worth is to overcome shame, guilt, and fear with vulnerability, humility, and forgiveness.

Some personality traits can make it easier to be vulnerable and self-accepting. The Five Factor Model is a grouping of five personality traits that describe the fundamental dimensions on which people differ from others. These traits are Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism. A rating higher in Openness and Agreeableness may be seen as a tendency to appreciate a wider array of ideas, morals, and emotions, and have more helpful and forgiving behaviors. Lower levels of Neuroticism are represented by more self-secure, self-satisfaction, and lower irritability. People on both ends of the spectrum for Conscientiousness and Extraversion have reported both high and low self-esteem suggesting that these traits do not affect one’s self-worth. All of this being true, not everyone on the planet has these exact traits which is great because it allows us to have a more rich and diverse population. However, it also means that some people may have more trouble experiencing self-worth than others.

For those, like Brown, who are seeking a whole-hearted and vulnerable life, therapy is an option. One form of therapy that may be particularly helpful for self-esteem is humanistic/person-centered therapy (PCT) in which the therapist adopts the role of passive guide, also known as unconditional positive regard, by conveying understanding, sympathy, and warmth while being free of praise or criticism. This environment encourages the patient to be comfortable searching within themselves and recognize their self-worth. PCT is highly favorable with patients with most finding the supportive environment very gratifying. However, this kind of therapy uses similar strategies for all clients and may not be the right fit for everyone.

Fortunately, there are other types of therapies such as cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). The theory of this model of therapy is that thoughts generate feelings that cause behaviors, and then those behaviors bolster those original thoughts, working in a cycle. The basis of CBT is reappraisal/cognitive restructuring in which the therapist identifies the patient’s untrue maladaptive thoughts for the patient to dispose of such thought patterns or adjust them to something more adaptive. This type of therapy uses therapist-assigned homework to work on in-the-moment behavior goals in between sessions. More work and effort is required of the patient in this therapeutic design because of its present-focused style, CBT has the greatest empirical backing for its effectiveness and is found, consistently, to be better than other therapies. This treatment method can take negative thoughts and turn them into positive ones of self-worth, self-acceptance, and a sense of gratitude for life as it is.

Positivity is extremely important to our well-being. Positive Psychology is the methodical study of what makes humans flourish with the three key strengths being gratitude, humility, and forgiveness. Practicing gratefulness improves life satisfaction by increasing positive conscious thoughts of pleasant life experiences. Humility also contributes to life satisfaction because it involves accurate self-appraisal of one’s strengths and weaknesses causing a sense of self-acceptance and openness to diverse experiences of ideas, new information, and receiving advice. Humility is important to holding a positive perspective of one’s capabilities. Lastly, forgiveness is the source of inner peace. Holding resentment towards oneself and others is what leads to hate and self-loathing. Forgiveness is imperative to overcoming feelings of shame and guilt, and for holding onto harmony within relationships. Forgiveness is an extremely powerful action people can take, both internally and with others, to improve their ability to be vulnerable and connect.

Essay about Forgiveness in ‘The Scarlet Letter’

Everyone has committed a crime. However, some sins are unforgivable, to the point that they seem unforgivable. The ‘unforgivable sin’ is the obedience of the mind to the intellect. Nathaniel Hawthorne through Arthur Dimmesdale, Hester Prynne, and Roger Chillingworth There are some excellent examples in The Scarlet Letter. Through the differences in the lives of these three roles, Hawthorne taught that confession rather than concealment is a better option. This is important because most people prefer to hide their flaws because they will appreciate what other people think of themselves. However, this search for perfection is an important element of Puritan society, Hawthorne rejected this point, showing that Hawthorne showed his behavior by criticizing his Puritan thinking with his personality. As textual evidence, it can be seen that Dimmesdale and Hester Prynne committed adultery, but this is not a seemingly unforgivable crime. His fault was that he told the people a lie about his adultery.

Dimsdale lied not to tell the people that he did not commit adultery, but not to tell them anything. This forces Hester to endure all the punishments until the end of the novel when Dimmesdale finally exposes her secrets to the city. Chillingworth also committed a sin that seemed unforgivable. It seems to be a person without a heart. His sin is Dimmesdale’s slow revenge and torture, but since this is the goal he has pursued since the beginning of the novel, his heart is hard to find. Dimmesdale committed the crime of violating the Ten Commandments, while Chillingworth committed many of the seven deadly sins, primarily jealousy and anger. When he discovered Hester’s adultery, he was not only angry and wanted revenge, but also jealous. He is jealous that his wife is the mother of another man’s son.

Chilingworth’s anger was the most unforgivable of his sins. It can also be said that Dimmesdale and Hester did not commit an unforgivable sin because they repented for themselves from the heart. However, Hester boldly admitted this and predated Dimmesdale. But their hearts succumbed to intelligence and confession, instead of eliminating their sins. Used to end the consequences of your sins. Hester’s crime was hiding Chillingworth’s identity from Dimmesdale, and Dimmesdale’s crime was hiding her role in Hester’s adultery from the community. In this sense, these two sins are unforgivable, covered by deception, and hurt your loved ones, Killingworth. When Dimmesdale asked her about Chillingworth, she asked, ‘Who is that person, Hester?’ I tremble before him! Do you know this person? I hate it, Hester! Hester was silent and let Dimsdale continue to suffer. Because Hester concealed her knowledge of Chillingworth and instead convinced Dimmesdale that she was still perfect, Hawthorne was used throughout the novel They both punish her by depriving her of her femininity, saying that she is dead in her heart and that she wears a hat to cover up your beautiful hair… Suffice it to say that this transition is disgusting. On the contrary, when Hester finally tells Dimsdale in the woods and pleads guilty, she regains her beauty, and after taking off her hair, ‘Her sex, her youth, and her beauty are all rich and come back ‘The transformation is described as miraculous: ‘Recovering from… an irreparable past.’ Through Hester, Hawthorne demonstrated the consequences of unforgivable sins to emphasize the importance of openness and honesty. Sex. Hester, unlike Dimsdale, is free from sin. When a person cannot forgive himself like Arthur Dimmesdale, he needs the forgiveness of everyone else before he can forgive himself. Dimmesdale could not tell anyone what he did because he might be sentenced to death for it. He is a pastor. He was too scared of other people’s reactions to tell others what he did. Therefore, he cannot be forgiven. This sin was eaten up in Demisdale until he could no longer live. All this is because he cannot get forgiveness from the people in the community and himself. Although all these evils are forgivable, they don’t seem to be the case because of our human nature.

The Power of Forgiveness Essay

Do you ask for forgiveness frequently? When excess affects self-esteem

Do you ask for forgiveness frequently? Saying ‘sorry’, in principle, is one of the social ‘glues’ that strengthen our relationships. However, doing it constantly can weaken our self-esteem. Let us think that the act of apologizing must be punctual and meaningful, not a continuous and almost obsessive exercise where, in some way, our lack of confidence is revealed.

‘Sorry to bother you, but: can I ask you a question?’, ‘Excuse me, can you leave me that pen there?’, ‘Sorry, but I think that …’ We could give a thousand examples of those situations in which the noun ‘sorry ‘Becomes the protagonist of our conversations.

Something that at first could be a distinctive feature of our courtesy or good education sometimes becomes a dynamic with negative implications for ourselves.

Jean de la Bruyère said that there is only a permissible excess in our world, and it is none other than to show genuine gratitude. Because the act of giving thanks is not the same as being truly grateful.

The same happens with forgiveness. We can pronounce this word twenty times a day, forty times even. However, it will always be preferable to use this term when it is truly necessary. Let’s reflect on it.

“Asking for forgiveness does not always mean that we are wrong and that the other is right. It simply means that we value a relationship much more than our ego. ”

-Anonymous-

Do you ask for forgiveness frequently? Stop apologizing excessively

When you ask for forgiveness, you often imply that the other should free you from something. Sooner or later, the people around you will end up tired, or even more, they will end up thinking that you don’t have enough confidence to act autonomously. Thus, and as happens in any area of ​​life, every extreme is bad, whether we abuse something as if we completely dispense with any dimension.

An example of the latter is Donald Trump. One of his best-known phrases is that he states ‘never apologize because he simply never makes mistakes. ‘ Another example of this is that of Martin Winterkorn, the former CEO of Volkswagen.

Despite the fraud committed in the emissions of his diesel cars, it took almost a year to publicly apologize. When he did, the trust of a large part of the customers was already ‘broken. ‘

On the other side of the scale are undoubtedly all those profiles that make use and abuse of apologies. Sometimes for education and courtesy and sometimes for simple insecurity, they are not aware of the implications that this may have. Let’s see it below.

We devalue the purpose of forgiveness

Forgiving and asking for forgiveness are two highly therapeutic exercises. They resolve conflicts, release charges, and relieve tensions. Few acts involve greater responsibility than assuming involvement in a grievance or offense to ask the other party to be forgiven for it. Now, if we spend the day asking for forgiveness for minor things, the essence of forgiveness loses meaning and relevance.

We devalue ourselves

Do you ask for forgiveness frequently? Then stop for a moment to reflect on the following idea. How do you think others see you every time you apologize for something that has no importance or impact? Some situations do not justify the use of this word. Much of the time when you use it there has been no real circumstance in which you need to be forgiven.

We must understand that not by asking for more times forgiveness we will be more humble, more correct, or respectful. Do not apologize for asking, for passing, for sitting, for that pencil that you drop, for asking for help, for breathing … It combines self-esteem and strengthens your confidence.

Woman worried and thinking about him, do you ask for forgiveness frequently?

We apologize as a wild card to get out of certain situations

Most of us do: ask for forgiveness like someone who uses a wild card to get out of the way in certain situations. These are moments when somehow, our insecurity or shyness emerges. Let’s think about it. It is common to ask for forgiveness when we address a stranger or someone who imposes on us ⇔ ‘Sorry can I ask you a question? ‘Excuse me, could you give me that key that I have dropped …’

The problem, therefore, more than in the use of this word is to ‘abuse’ it. When it becomes that persistent resource in our vocabulary, in that gear with which to move in large part of our social scenarios.

When to ask for forgiveness and when not?

Do you ask for forgiveness frequently? Then you probably want to know when it is better to do it and when not. Working on this aspect of our behavior will make us feel more competent and safe in any situation and scenario.

When to ask for forgiveness:

Ask for forgiveness when you have caused harm to someone.

Do it when you have offended, disappointed, or hurt a person’s feelings.

Ask to be forgiven when you repent of a behavior or an action taken.

Be able to ask for forgiveness every time you make a mistake and your mistake affects others.

Ask forgiveness to close stages, to leave old grudges behind.

Let’s try to be able to ask ourselves for forgiveness. We all accumulate errors or poor choices that weigh in our present and deserve to be released, and forgiven.

When not to apologize

Do not ask for forgiveness when you are giving your opinion.

Avoid saying this word in situations where this dimension is meaningless: when you talk to someone when you want to ask a question when you need to take something …

Avoid asking for forgiveness when you need help.

Do you ask for forgiveness frequently? Although there are times when asking for an apology is necessary, in many cases we abuse this term in situations where its use is not effective.

Although we have heard that ‘asking for forgiveness does not make us strong’, we understand that everything has a limit. Sometimes, abuse blurs the real and powerful sense of this healthy term and we lose self-esteem. Let’s make proper and wise use of this wonderful dimension.

To forgive is to be able to travel to the past and return without pain

When they hurt us, our immediate reaction is not to want to forgive who did it to us. We are offended, disappointed, and in some cases in deep pain. But this very common and natural reaction also has its difficulties.

It is true that, in the short term, maintaining rancor can prevent the damage from continuing; and that is why we do not usually forgive the person who caused us pain first. But if we continue to hold a person’s grudge for too long it is as if we are mentally trapped in a situation that no longer exists. This will cause us all kinds of intense feelings, which can cause us to suffer unnecessary suffering.

Two of the most negative states that the mind can maintain, and which occur because of not knowing how to forgive in time, are hate and anger. Seneca described hate and anger as the most horrible and frenetic of all emotions. In many cases, the damages that they cause us are much greater than the possible benefits that can cause us to continue holding the grudge.

However, forgiving those who have hurt us is not as simple as just wanting it. Once we come to accept the harmful effects of maintaining hate, and we want to learn to forgive people who in the past caused us pain, the next question is obvious: how do we do it?

If one encounters a person who has been shot by an arrow, he does not take the time to ask where he came from, or to analyze what type of wood is made; on the contrary, he will focus on trying to extract it immediately to minimize damage. We should do the same with suffering, eliminating it as soon as possible without giving it more room to continue harming us. Below we will describe some of the most powerful reasons to start practicing forgiveness.

‘If you don’t forgive for love, forgive at least for selfishness, for your well-being.’

-Dalai Lama-

Forgiveness is a sign of strength

In the Western mind, patience and tolerance are considered important values to some extent. However, when someone hurts us, responding with patience and tolerance seems to convey weakness and passivity. This is one of the main reasons why it costs us so much to forgive others.

But, since these two virtues are indispensable components of emotions such as forgiveness or love, we should not see them as a sign of weakness. On the contrary, we could begin to understand them rather as a sign of strength, which comes from a deep capacity to stand firm in our values.

Responding to a painful situation with patience and tolerance is a sign of emotional strength, and it will help us get closer to forgiveness than to a reaction of anger and hate. In addition, managing to face a difficult situation with this attitude implies exercising important control over our feelings, which means having good self-esteem and emotional intelligence.

‘To forgive is only learned in life when we have needed to be forgiven a lot’.

Forgiveness is the water that exterminates the fires of the soul

The U theory teaches us that we cannot live in the future with the burden of the past behind us. Saying goodbye to what has already happened, and forgiving the mistakes of others and your own, opens a space for new opportunities.

As Otto Scharmer, creator of the U theory, points out, “Energy follows attention. That is why we should not focus our attention on what we try to avoid, but on what we intend to happen. ” For example, a person who is resentful of the disappointments of the past will search without realizing those same results in all his actions and relationships, because he is anchored in the loop of what happened and not in the new that can happen.

The U theory says, among other things, that as long as we do not let go of old fears and prejudices (for which it uses the English expression let it go), we will not leave room for anything truly new to happen in our life ( let it come). If we do not let go of the burden of the past, there will be no space for life to surprise us with new experiences.

As we can see, forgiving someone when he has hurt us can be very difficult. Precisely for that reason, we must understand the reasons why it is worth learning to do so. Remember that it is in your hands to let go of the past, thus freeing you from a heavy emotional burden that does not let you move forward.

‘Forgiving allows us to be happy and enjoy life since it is human to make mistakes’.