The Perfect Human Being Is All Of Us Together That Make Perfection written by: karakia
We are all familiar with the good old saying, the perfect human being is all human beings put together, thus it is a collective, it is all of us that make perfection. There are many circumstances in life when we have had to draw inspirational from this quote and one of those often happens when dealing with a returning citizen. In this article, we are going to look at the various challenges faced by a returning citizen, based on the notion that the perfect human being is all of us together that make perfection.
The life of a returning citizen is one full of challenges –challenges to the citizen themselves and their families as well as to the general community. At a personal level, the individual often has to contend with the negative society attitude towards them, attitudes that may have been built as a result of sustained depiction of them as villains who deserve no just treatment from anyone. Their families are often also victims of ridicule, thanks to the society’s incurable ill of blanket condemnation. It is against this backdrop that we came up with a community-based initiative of helping the returning citizens with their re-entry in the
…show more content…
It is important to note that whether their families were expecting them or not, the mere fact that they are an addition to the family brings about a corresponding financial implication. It is our duty to find them gainful employment as a way of expediting the integration process. We ensure that we assist them in locating local companies looking to fill up positions. By extension, we help them in certain technical aspects such as drafting their resumes, just so their past does not creep up and make them lose out on an opportunity to secure a
America is a land filled with immigrants coming from different corners of the worlds, all in hopes of finding a better life in the country. However, No one had an easy transition from his or her home country to this foreign land. Not every race thrived the same way—some were luckier than others, while some have faced enormous obstacles in settling down and being part of the American society. Many people have suffered
“The word perfection cannot be defined into one person or one thing. Perfection can only be told or seen in a first person view. No one will genuinely think something or someone is as perfect as another person, it’s impossible to see eye to eye with something that is as powerful and subjective as perfection.” - Jordan van der neut, 2014
Immigrants must overcome many barriers to succeed in America. First, migrants frequently must learn a new language. Inability to communicate is a critical barrier for accessing the health care system (Urrutia-Rojas, Marshall, Trevino, Lurie, & Minguia-Bayona, 2006). Second, the processes of work and schooling for themselves and their families can be daunting. Lastly, immigrants use the established social network of longer duration residents for reference and knowledge (Nandi, Galea, Lopez, Nandi, Strongarone, & Ompad, 2008). For purposes of this report, there are three different types of immigrant: legal, undocumented, and refugees or persons seeking asylum. All three types of residents want to succeed and achieve their personal dream.
Michael Sandel is a distinguished political philosopher and a professor at Harvard University. Sandel is best known for his best known for his critique of John Rawls's A Theory of Justice. While he is an acclaimed professor if government, he has also delved deeply into the ethics of biotechnology. At Harvard, Sandel has taught a course called "Ethics, Biotechnology, and the Future of Human Nature" and from 2002 to 2005 he served on the President’s Council on Bioethics (Harvard University Department of Government, 2013). In 2007, Sandel published his book, The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering, in which he explains unethical implications biotechnology has and may have in the near future regarding genetic engineering.
Egoism is the philosophical concept of human self-interest and the relationship between ethics, altruism, and rationality (Robbins). Psychological egoism and ethical egoism are the two concepts or positions that explain how one is or ought to be motivated to obtain their self-interest. The difference between ethical and psychological egoism is that the former deals with how a person should act and the latter deals with a universal concept practiced by all. With the theory of psychological egoism, selfishness proves it to be false; thus, can true ethical egoism be possible?
The view of an Ethical Egoist, henceforth to be referred as the egoist, is quite simple in a way. The way to determine WWTED (What would the egoist do?), can be easily done if one refers back to the principles of an egoist. The view of an egoist depends on the following: 1. We ought always to do what is in our long term best interest, 2. The right act, or duty, is the act that maximizes our long term intrinsic good, and 3. Our duty is to do that which benefits us the most in the long term. In other words, an egoist’s actions and decisions depend on whether the act will benefit himself in the long run.
A violent environment and family reunification plays a vital role in driving children to abandon their home country, but crime, gang fears and hostility seem to be the strongest factors for children’s decision to emigrate. According to Elizabeth Kennedy. This is especially true for most young males, who have no other choice but to join vicious gangs, or leave their homes in hopes to find a job that allows them work half the day and focus on their education the other half in order to achieve a better opportunity of life. According to Sonia Nazario, “One in three children lists family reunification as the principal reason to depart home. Not surprisingly, over 90 % of the children she interviewed have a family member
Citizenship is something that largely defines many of us. Our citizenship comes with a community, a group of people and land to which we belong, as well as a sense of pride. Citizens of a community must coexist and cooperate with one another for the community to thrive and prosper. The idea of individuals within a community forming a mutual trust and respect for one another, is a concept Danielle Allen introduces as “political friendship.” Political friendship extends beyond the immediate reaches of one’s community, but to strangers entering one’s own community, or to those of another community with which you seek to enter. It is not friendship in the sense that a bond is formed or that there is deep rooted affection present, but rather one
The interaction between the immigrant and the citizens of the receiving country varies on whether or not their introduction into the new country is seen as a loss or something positive. These differing stances serve as a buffer for an immigrant’s desires, as they can either advance or stagger depending on how far their new situation allows them to advance. For this reason, the likely success of the individual depends on the descending community’s desire to embrace them. This acceptance or denial presents itself in the form of the resources available to “the other.” If these outsiders are not given the tools with which to function properly they will likely find solace in the ethnic specific networks that provide them with a means to survive.
Adoration of God; solidarity with a definitive; turning into one with the universe; concordance of body, psyche, soul, and nature; these expressions point to the key objectives of the significant religious customs. The objectives mentioned speak to wellbeing in the most important sense (Meier, O 'Connor & VanKatwyk, 2005). They can be accomplished through a relationship between the broad sense of being of the individual and the group. Religious groups perceive human enduring, disorder, and social unfairness as issues identified with human detachment from an extreme reality and disharmony in the middle of self and world. Cures may include religiously based treatment practices, reflection, a request to God, physical controls like hatha yoga,
Human reason has not always been a presence in our daily lives. Doing the right thing, being ethical, and making educated decisions, one would think, are the ideal principles behind human nature. Sadly, only in more recent times has human reason shed its good grace on more modern societies. For many centuries, constant war and the reconstruction to nations, countries, and empires led to the rise and fall of many different leaders and in tow their governments. Within such societies, political spokesmen like Machiavelli, Locke, and Marx, interpret their ideas to the people, which still remain significant to this day. One of their main focuses was to raise awareness, on their ideas on trust and human reason. While Locke and Marx urge us to have faith in human reason, as a positive means to society, Machiavelli would claim the contrary. The concept of human nature and reason to both John Locke and Karl Marx juxtaposes that of Machiavelli’s, and their notions derive from their different eras, economies, environments, and strict governments, which ultimately shaped their ideologies on human nature.
Why be moral? This is a question that I’ve asked myself for many weeks since the beginning of this class. I wanted to know why is being moral so important to some people myself included. This also lead me to another question, which is why is it easier for some people and harder for others to be moral? First, let 's understand what it is to be moral. One definition of moral is concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character. Another definition is a person 's standards of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do. From both of these definitions, we get that being moral concerns right and wrong and being able to differentiation from both of those and having your actions reflect what you believe is right and wrong.
Many theories bombarded in an attempt to set a moral code by which people are ought to live by. Plenty of controversies and arguments are raised against each one. One of the controversial moral doctrines is egoism, or simply preferring one's self interest over other's interests and desires. The doctrine seems to be reasonable to a certain extent at first, yet it fails drastically when having a second thought about it. Throughout my essay, I will explain the different types of egoism, and argue for each one of them. Finally, I will provide counter arguments for each type along with my personal opinion and analysis.
What is the value of a life? Is it how long you live, what you accomplish during your lifetime, or things you acquire? The ethics and moral reasoning behind this simple question does wealth equate to happiness? This has been asked many times and the debate from both sides has great points and emphasis, but I would like to talk about those who seem to be thrown on the back burner the needy. Now if you were to hear the word needy many different categories come to mind homeless, unemployed, sick, and the underprivileged. Each sector is different in terms of the needs and what is asked to help them: however they stand together in regards to some type of assistance to help them attain and maintain simple everyday tasks in their lives.
Interpersonal relationships are those that we have with other people. Communication between others is essential to human survival. We communicate to get what we need: food, affection, knowledge, understanding, money, the list goes on. In these relationships, we build our image of ourselves, learn to trust, and sometimes fall apart. This paper will analyze interviews discussing what happens in their real life experiences with relationships and compare how they may differ from person to person.