Components of Research Proposal Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Components of - Research Proposal Example Components of Research Proposal This paper, thus, aims to discuss research proposals and their components, in order to equip the reader with at least an idea pertaining to how to write a research proposal. Discussion A research proposal defined is a statement of intent to explore a subject or topic, and following is a detailed plan for this exploration. A student seeks the help of more experienced people, such as their faculty professors for supervision of their research, as well as guidance. For this reason, the students must ensure that the research proposal they prepare is useful, as well as acceptable, and feasible, for every person involved (Kolb, 2008). One can consider a researcher to be a voyager on the path to discovery, where the proposal is the star that guides their journey and help them avoid fault turns. A few essential sections are needed in every research proposal in order to be complete, other than the title page, abstract and table of contents. These are: Introduction When one embarks on the task of exploring something, it always helps to start with a vague yet much needed description of what the research question actually is. This description is a brief statement of the reason for interest in the topic, and the general nature of the concern. There are several possibilities for the themes, which the introduction can have (Ethridge, 2004). It may describe a person or coalition, which raises an issue for the researcher such as change in law affecting taxation in municipalities. Other than this, the topic may just be one that is a subject of interest of concern for the researcher, for which there is not enough information available. Finally, the topic may be related to something that provokes the researchers’ curiosity, like wanting to know what the conflicting opinions of citizens about health policies in a certain area (Ethridge, 2004). The proposal must go on to turn this general concept into a specific research question, which reveals the authors area of focus and th e hypothesis it plans to test (Kolb, 2008). The question should be one that challenges or explores a concept, and one that the researcher cannot yet answer. One way of narrowing the proposal down to one such question is to first draft a proposal with several questions, and then specify the line of inquiry. Objectives & Rationale In the objectives, the researcher states their aims from the research, and the specific and general goals it has. The rationale of the proposal (Jansen, 1997) brings forward the problems one can expect from the research, and any limitations that the researchers will face during it. It discusses these while keeping in focus the main purpose for wanting to conduct the research, the ‘rationale.’ Research Statement Here, the researcher will state the research question mentioned above, with brevity and clarity. They will also mention their intentions in the research, and the achievements they have planned. The thesis of the paper, which will follow l ater on, will revolve around this question. Theoretical Framework (Literature Review) The literature review of the paper will consist of a heavy amount of research, from formal and scholarly sources. This will consist of information both theoretical and empirical. This information will be required to present an argument in light of the question, whether by purporting it or opposing it, in order to build a clearer understanding of the topic (Ethridge, 2004).

Ethical Dilemmas Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Ethical Dilemmas - Essay Example Besides, organizations are engaged in shifting their manufacturing facilities to developing countries as a cost cutting measure. However, such strategy of organizations has led towards the emergence of many ethical problems between the organizations and its stakeholders (Karake-Shalhoub, 1999). Ethical dilemma is literally defined as a moral situation in which an individual has to make choice between two or more options. On the other hand, ethical dilemma in business is said to be existing when the decision makers within the organizations are encountered with making choices amongst two alternatives that may have a serious impact on the organization’s profit earning capability and/or its stakeholders (Shata, 2013; Fernando, 2009). Correspondingly, this essay intends to demonstrate an in-depth understanding and application of the ethical dimension of business decision making. In the given case study, Omax which is a large home appliances company is faced with the radical need to cut its workforce as its one of the strategies to shift its manufacturing activities to developing countries. In a board meeting, senior management team assigned Jenny who is working as HR manager in the company with the task to downsize the procurement department within the company. However, there are two individuals namely Alan and John who are currently working as procurement officers and are liable for sourcing suppliers. Unenviably, only one position is available within the procurement department corresponding to the downsizing strategy. Hence, Jenny is challenged with the choice to retain either Alan or John. Notably, off the job both Jenny and John are the members of book club and have formed friendship with each other. Besides, Jenny is also aware that John recently has a new born baby and realizes that the job would important for John and for his family. Now, Jenny is fi nding it difficult to make decision regarding the layoff. Jenny is unsure

A Response To Peter Singer

A Response To Peter Singer In Famine, Affluence, and Morality, Peter Singer discusses that people are dying in Bengal from a lack of food, shelter, and medical care. Singer discusses in detail how poverty and war have created a large number of refugees that require millions just to keep them alive. Singer claims that countries and nations like Australia and Britain have given a considerable amount of assistance, but what has been given is not nearly enough. Singer believes that we have an obligation to prevent misfortunes such as, starvation or poverty, from occurring so long as it doesnt require us to sacrifice something equally as important. To reiterate, Singers main argument is, if it is in our power to prevent something very bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything morally significant, we ought, morally, to do it (Singer, p. 231). Singer responds that starvation in Bengal could be greatly reduced if everyone decided to pitch in. Singer opens his article with his example of a drowning child. To summarize, the scenario involves a person walking by a child who is drowning. Singer questions whether to go in after the child and get our clothes muddy, or to allow the child to drown. The vast majority of people would agree that one would have an obligation to save the drowning child. This can be related to Singers main argument, as one would have the power to prevent the child from drowning and getting ourselves dirty is not sacrificing anything equally significant. Singer also brings to light that whether there were other bystanders around while the child was drowning, even if they werent helping to save the child, one would still be morally obligated to save the child. Singers counter-argument is that we are more likely to help those that are close (the drowning child) then help those that are far away (starving refugees in Bengal). Singers response is that distance is irrelevant in what we should morally do. Sin gers example is simple and purposeful, and it leads us into the rest of his article. Peter Singer discusses a sense of equality, and how if we accept equality as part of our morality, then we cannot say that someone far away is not in need based on proximity and distance alone. After all, someone suffering in Bengal versus someone suffering in California should be viewed the same, right? Singer feels there are human fallacies with regards to the way we think. In his eyes, we are less likely to give to those that are far away regardless of how badly they need it. According to Singer, we need to evaluate how we help others that are far away. However, we need to be morally obligated to our families and our own country (our own poor, starving, homeless, etc), and it makes perfect sense that we will help those that are close in proximity. If we spent all of our extra money on those that live far away and forgot about those in need in our own country, how is that living up to Singers main argument of à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦without sacrificing anything more significant? Singer resp onds by stating that donating is not a charity, but a duty. It is our duty to assist those in need. Singer provides a second counter-argument against the drowning child and the Bengal refugees. In the example of the drowning child, there is only one person to help but in the example of the refugees, there are millions upon millions to provide help. Singer responds to this by writing that regardless of whether you are the only one, or there are millions, it doesnt lessen your obligation to help. A third counter-argument presented by Singer regards famine. If everyone who could help, and still live within their means, gave a fixed amount of money in an attempt to prevent the famine then that is all wed be obligated to give. People who could only afford a fixed amount would donate the fixed amount while people who could afford much more than the fixed amount would still only be morally obligated to donate the fixed amount. Singers response is that this is a skewed way of reasoning, because people who can afford more should give more while people who can afford a little only give a little. Singers concept of marginal utility, as written by Singer (1972) himself is à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦the level at which, by giving more, I would cause as much suffering to myself or my dependents as I would relieve by my gift. (p. 241). Singer continues to say, This would mean, of course, that one would reduce oneself to very near the material circumstances of a Bengali refugee. (p. 241). This relates to Singers main argument because the amount of help that is needed in Bengal and other countries is so great that it is highly unlikely that amount of assistance will ever be provided. In his article, Singer states The traditional distinction between duty and charity cannot be drawn, or at least, not in the place we normally draw it. (p. 235) Singers concept of duty is what we are morally obligated to do, and his concept of charity is giving money to a charitable cause but because of how charity is viewed there is nothing wrong with not giving. His concepts later change in his article when he discusses that his argument cannot support people in developed nations living an affluent lifestyle should enjoy giving money to those in need. If I was able to reach out to Singer and respond to his article, I would tell him that people are not morally required to do as much as he is asking of us. If we did exactly as Singer wanted, and that would be to quit our jobs and work full time to put an end to poverty and starvation, where would that leave us? Everybody involved in this full time effort would drop everything they were doing in order to meet the goal of ending starvation. Critical breakthroughs in science and technology would cease to exist because wed all be pitching in towards the goal. If there was an instance of choosing to do donate to the relief of starvation, which would probably yield excellent results, and choosing to do something that you wanted, which might yield good results, Singer would object and state that choosing to donate to the relief of starvation is our moral duty. Of course, there is no definitive way of knowing whether donating to the relief of doing something that we really wanted would be more or less beneficial than the other. Instead of donating, I might want to research and experiment more into a cure for HIV, while someone else may want to learn a second language or learn advanced physics. The point is that we dont know what everyones exact interests are, and therefore, we cant say whether it would be beneficial to donate over doing something we wanted to do. I would end my response to Peter Singer with an open-ended, yet thought provoking question: With regards to your moral duties, how much are you giving to charity and what have you done to prevent bad things from occurring, Mr. Singer? In conclusion, Singer is correct in his article. Humans should do more than we do to help those in need, regardless of their proximity or distance. However, I think Singer is overly exaggerated in his views and humans should not do as much as he expects us to do. It simply doesnt work.

Archetypes In Waterworld :: Film, Movie

The 1995 hit film Waterworld is a prime example of archetypes appearing in modern motion pictures. The movie displays three main characteristics that give it archetypal meaning. The first of these is the classic hero archetype. Secondly, many archetypal elements of nature are displayed. Lastly, many other archetypes such as safety, extremes, and topography appear in the film.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Waterworld perfectly portrays the heroic archetype. Kevin Costner plays the role of the mariner whose quest is to get to dryland. Playing the evil side is Dennis Hopper who acts as the evil deacon whose mission is to stop the mariner and get to dryland first. The mariner is forced to leave his current lifestyle and is almost killed shortly afterwards. Along the way, he receives help from a wise old man, soul mate, and innocent youth. Costner defeats the deacon when the young girl, Enola, is captured. Soon after, they return to dryland where everything is peaceful and resources abound.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The various settings in Waterworld include many archetypes and add meaning to the story. For one, the deep, salty sea engulfs the whole world. Archetypally, this holds a demonic meaning, and in Waterworld the characters are constantly trying to overcome it. The sun also makes it very hot, giving the characters a thirst which cannot be quenched, as there is no water. Furthermore, any vegetation is extremely valuable because it gives the people vital nutrients, which they need to survive.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Many other archetypes also appear in the film. For example, the mariners ship is a place of safety for the mariner and his companions. Therefore it has a positive archetypal meaning and is important to the story. In addition, negative archetypes also emerge. Two of these are extreme heat and dessert like topography.

Analysis of Dinner Party Essay

The text under analysis is named The Dinner Party, written by Nicholas Monsarrat. Monsarrat is a British novelist known for his sea stories and his novels, The Tribe That Lost Its Head and its sequel, Richer Than All His Tribe. The Dinner Party is a piece of narration. It tells us about a rich man (uncle Octavian), who was a hospitable and friendly man, and liked to give parties – until January 3, 1925. It was his fifty-fifth birthday. As usually on such a day he was giving a party, a party for twelve people. All of them were old friends. During the party he was admired a magnificent diamond ring on the princess’s hand. Then the ring was passed from hand to hand, and so it was lost or stolen although all the guests were close friends. Nobody returned the princess’s ring back, so it was never found and it never appeared. Since that event Uncle Octavian never gave a single lunch or dinner party for the last thirty years of his life. He died a comparatively poor man with the special sadness of a hospitable host. The purpose of the author is to show how it’s significant to have values, principles and it doesn’t make a difference if you are poor or rich. Uncle Octavian believed in his friends and suffered from this at the end as one person, one of his close friends is appeared to be a thief. Uncle Octavian lost all his friends and was never able to believe anyone from that day. The story is well-structured, so it may be divided into the following parts: exposition, complication, conflict, climax and denouement. The first part begins with â€Å"There are still some rich people †¦Ã¢â‚¬  and ends with â€Å"†¦until January 3, 1925.â€Å" It tells us about rich people in their princess world and claims that even those have their problems. In this part we meet with the author, unnamed, and the main character (my uncle Octavian), who is described as a charming, hospitable and most amiable man with the help of epithets. The second part begins with the words â€Å"Let me tell you a story †¦Ã¢â‚¬  and ends with â€Å"all old and intimate friends of my uncle Octavian.† This passage describes the author’s feelings about staying at such event – the 55th birthday of his uncle, and the party itself. Here we observe a description of uncle’s friends and to stress how rich and important the friends of Octavian were the author uses metaphor â€Å"old flames†, and epithets such as â€Å"respective husbands†, â€Å"exceptional intelligence and his fabulous American wife†. The next part begins with â€Å"Towards the end of a wonderful dinner †¦Ã¢â‚¬  and finishes with â€Å"†¦saw her pass it on.† Here we become  acquainted with a princess and her magnificent ring, loved by everyone at the table. The ring itself is described very vividly to stress its importance for example here the author uses an allusion to Genghis Khan. The climax of t he story is the moment when everyone understands that the ring is lost or stolen. Here the author describes dreadful embarrassment of Uncle Octavian’s cherished friends and uncle’s belief in good of his close friends. Colorful epithets are used to show growing anxiety among the guests: dreadful, fruitless. In the epilogue we see that the ring was not never found and Octavian died poor man, never throwing a single party again as he lost his trust in people. Monsarrat uses antithesis to express how uncle’s life has changed since his 55th birthday: at the beginning he writes that he was â€Å"a happy rich man†, at the end â€Å"comparatively poor†. Poor here is also a metaphor used not only to describe his financial status, but also to show his inner feelings after that date – he lost his trust, his beliefs were deceived. The tone of the story is grammatical and ironical at the same time, as the theme is judging people of being such liars even among friends – the theme itself is quite ironical.

Friar Lawrence is the only character to blame for the deaths of Romeo and Juliet. Do you agree? Essay

Romeo and Juliet is a tragic love story between two ‘star-crossed lovers,† written in 1596 by William Shakespeare. It is set in the town of Verona, Italy, where two households – the Montagues and Capulets- are involved in an ancient feud. One character who was in the middle of it all was Friar Lawrence, whose actions are put to blame for the death of Romeo and Juliet. Shortly after Romeo and Juliet fell in love with each other, their next intention was to marry. friar Lawrence agreed to marry them hoping it would stop the family feud and bring peace. That, however, was not the case after the death of Tybalt on Romeo’s behalf which caused Romeo to be banished from Verona, and Juliet to be distraught. Especially since she was now being forced to marry count Paris, with agreement from Friar Lawrence even with his knowledge of Romeo and Juliet’s marriage. Showing his carelessness for other people and his selfish ways to make sure only he is happy. Which a re two flaws that he shoes through out the play, and why he is the the only character to blame for the deaths of Romeo and Juliet. Naive is having or showing lack of judgement, or information. Which describes The Friar and his decisions he makes throughout the play. Friar Lawrence’s decision to marry Romeo and Juliet was an ambitious one due to his choice of not asking both parent’s, or talking to them before hand. This decision, however, made a huge impact on the rest of the play. The Friar’s thoughts were that marriage would stop the family feuds, as he had said to Romeo that the ‘alliance may so happy prove, to turn your households rancour to pure love.† Although he had good intentions, this thought soon turned deceitful, due to the parents not having knowledge of the marriage. This dishonestly towards them was due to his naive behaviour and just another reason for why he is to blame for the deaths or Romeo and Juliet. Foolishness is a key feature in many of the characters in the play. Friar Lawrence is a character who’s foolishness would have been one if his main regrets. After Romeo’s banishment from Verona, due to him murdering Tybalt, Juliet was told she was to marry Paris on thursday. Juliet’s reaction to the  news when the nurse informed her of the marriage was, â€Å"i pray you, tell my lord and father, madam, i will mot marry yet.† This was due to the fact she was still married to Romeo. The Friar also had knowledge of this but agreed to marry count Paris and Juliet anyway. Which also was deceitful to the parents. This, however, upset Juliet because of his dishonesty towards her marriage with Romeo. The Friar’s choices he made at this point show his foolish ways and his incautious decisions he had done which led up to the deaths of Romeo and Juliet. Selfishness and carelessness means having no care or concern for anyone but yourself. And Friar Lawrence showed he had these features when he made one of the biggest decisions in the play that has made him to be the reason for Romeo and Juliet’s death. It was The Friar who gave Juliet the sleeping potion to fake her death, knowing just as well that she was a heartbroken teenage girl who was not facing reality in her decision in wanting to die. He trusted Friar John to deliver a letter of great significance to Romeo, explaining the plan to him so that he would not believe Juliet is dead. Friar John was unsuccessful in delivering the letter and shows his incompetence when he says â€Å"I could not send it – here it is again.† These unthought and carless events resulted in the deaths of Romeo and Juliet. Thus mistake of Friar Lawrence’s was his worst through the entire play and why an important decision such as faking a death should be dealt with personally. Not only does Friar Lawrence fail to give Romeo the letter which would have saved both their lives, but he selfishly leaves Juliet at the tomb, where she needed someone the most, because he does not want to get caught by the watchmen. Putting himself before Juliet and leaving her for his own benefit. And having her take her own life alongside her husband, with the Friar having mo waited a little longer, he might have been able to have stopped Juliet from using Romeo’s dagger to kill herself, and saved both lives of the teenagers. Many characters had a part in the lead up to the deaths of Romeo and Juliet. Although, the character with the overall blame for it, was Friar Lawrence. His actions and choices through out the play all ended all ended up with the deaths of the two teenagers, who trusted him the most. These actions were  made due to his naive, foolish and selfish behaviour that was shown through the play. From his dishonesty of not informing the families of the marriage in the first place, and agreeing to marry off Juliet to another man, and having her threaten to kill herself if he doesn’t help her to not marry him. It all led up to his worst decision, of giving Juliet the potion after she threatened to take her own life, and not caring enough to organise a better plan then he had, which all eventually resulted in the deaths of Romeo and Juliet. Making him the only character to blame for the deaths of Romeo and Juliet.