Violent Video games not the cause for youth violence Essay Example for Free

Violent Video games not the cause for youth violence Essay Violent video games and television shows has been the source of entertainment for years. Violent video games made its first appearance in the early 1970’s. In 1972 Sony released a very popular game, Call of Duty. This game series, gave many people, especially youth, aspirations to join the military. In 2004 Icon Productions released of the most realistic movies in history. The movie Passion of The Christ depicted a very clear and precise way that people were treated in the older days. Many may argue these first two categories of violence were the booster seats of violence, but these violent video games and other entertainment outlets have little to do with contributing to youth violence. According to Jacob, 65% of youth today do not have the instinct to determine what is real and what not (Purdue.) Violent video games are positively used, they help kids prepare for the military, build self- esteem within themselves and gain heroic qualities, despite contrary beliefs that it generates bullying and family violence. One of the most played video game series is Call of Duty. Call of Duty, used for military purposes. Americas Military use this game to stimulate fighting skills and to prepare their troops for battle. Lieutenant Johnson argued that fighting skills derived in this game may even protect them from mental stresses of combat (Holtz) The Military has really taken a hold of gaming technology. Call of Duty also in association with Modern warfare two has become a more effective tool for the Military than all other Army advertisements combined, according to MIT researchers (Holtz.) According to Pete Singer, mental horrors will prepare our people for war and kids who play these games will be more likely to grow up and go on to take on the world and protect the world. Video games sold in the United States made twenty one billion dollars just on violent video games. It has been argued that violent video games are bloody and do not serve a purpose to youth. Violent video games bring many benefits. One happens to be increasing self-esteem. When kids play violent video games that involve having a multiplayer, they learn to work as a team and they tend to build self-esteem for themselves. They either learn how to follow and take directions or take the lead unselfishly (Purdue.) The media likes to blame violent video games for the aggression in youth. In a recent broadcast, violent video games have given youth heroic qualities. Two teenage brothers Colten and Luke were out late to purchase Grand Theft Auto V. On their way home from the store they witnessed 70 year old elderly man burning in his apartment building. They quickly ran into the building and saved the man from burning. Colten and Luke are die hard grand theft auto fans and spend countless hours on the gaming system. The two did not run into the building to beat the elderly man and take all of his possessions, they saved him from the bottom of their hearts. This goes to show that violent video games do not create aggression in youth. It creates heroism. Some causes of youth violence are because of the society within society. Bullying has led violence to another level. April 20th, 1999, the Columbine shooting at a High School located in Littleton, Colorado tool place. The two suspects were Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris. These two young men total of thirteen people and one of them was in fact an educator. A seventeen year study of seven hundred children from the ages of 16-22 had less than one hour of daily viewing of media violence, causing their involvement in aggressive acts to be at 5.7% (purdue) Dylan and Eric had little known source of violent video games and television shows. Dylan and Eric were simply fed up with what they had been dealing with for years. Both were mentally and physically bullied at their local school and simply wanted revenge, so they planned for an attack. Exactly ten years later another catastrophic event took place on April 17th, 2011 with narcotics. The Seth Tyler Jackson case included one victim and six suspects. The young adults were not playing violent games like Grand Theft Auto or Halo or watching a violent movie such as Saw. The suspects were indeed smoking and using methamphetamine, a drug, which submerges the brain under a negative delusion. These types are not to blame on media violence, because violent games are used for good purposes. Other factors are early childhood abuse. Adolescents that were raised in an abusive household have a greater risk or chance of growing up and taking on violent actions. Doctors with PhD’s often argue that media violence is the blame for aggression that is shown in children in this generation. American Psychological Association studies have proven if a child sees his mother or father that they look up to beating someone they love, they will also think that it is right to do the same thing to other people when they become an adult. Statistics show that 70% of adolescents were brought up in abusive households, causing them to have violent intentions (purdue) Parents and Doctors argue that media violence has a negative effect on youth, but media violence has a positive effect on children. The factor that has a positive effect on children is, preparing them for combat like preparing them for the Military and creating a sense of self-esteem, team work and heroic qualities.

Bad Or Good :: essays research papers

Bad or Good We live in a world in which our primary food is the information. We perceive the outside world through images, and each image has an echo in our brain, generating feelings, attitudes and sometimes questions. Although we belong to the same specie, thousands of differences or similarities divide and classify us. Each of us perceives in his own way the information he receives. For some of us, something could be beautiful, for others the same thing could be ugly. Behind these two words, beautiful and ugly, we can see another words or, better said, concepts: good and bad. But what do good and bad mean? Do they really exist? On one hand, good and bad are two words that express our opinion in terms of perceived images. We give the images values, which can be, as I already said, good or bad. On the other hand, being so many types of human beings, it is normal to be different kinds of perception and interpretation of information. Therefore, having many people who can interpret things in different ways, it is difficult for somebody to say what is good or bad, and in the same time to have his opinion shared by everyone. Trying to classify, we might come up with a result that might be true or not, depending on the point of view. In other words everything is relative. Paradoxically, when we start thinking we, we discover that we actually know almost nothing, or that there are many things left, to be known. On the other hand, the more we know, the more we want to know. This desire of knowing more and more might be expressed through questions. One big difference that separates the human beings from animals is that

Ellen Moore: Living and Working in Korea Essay

The Korean culture on the other hand uses indirect communication which makes it hard for western cultures to understand what is really meant or wanted. In addition, the Confucianism in the Korean culture teaches to show respect for teachers and superiors. Showing respect to a teacher/superior implies to not ask questions to avoid offending the speaker by implying that the teaching is not well done and that the group cannot follow the subject taught. In this case the cultural behavior of the Korean consultants is causing major problems. Since the knowledge of the Korean consultants is by ar not as enhanced as the knowledge of the American counterparts, Scott is trying to give the consultants instructions how to tackle certain problems and how to structure the project, but is not able to confirm if these instructions were understood or if more explanations are needed. In addition, this cultural behavior is reducing the consultants’ ability to openly communicate with their superi ors such as Scott, Ellen, Jack and the client and speak freely about concerns, questions or better solutions they might have. Another communication barrier can be recognized in regards to gender. In Confucianism the male-female relationship is equal to superior-subordinate relationship. This causes major tension in the communication between Ellen and Jack since his norms and values might have led him to devalue the authority of Ellen’s input. This might explain why he is holding meetings without inviting Ellen and his refusal to use Ellen’s memo she prepared detailing the progress during her absence. Since Ellen is not speaking the Korean language and needs to rely on a translator, her ability to manage the team effectively and her understanding of different nuances in the Korean language are decreased and sometimes even diminished. Missing language skills is the third major communication barrier in this case which becomes very apparent at the dinner when Jack makes a very passive-aggressive speech in Korean. When the translator stops translating (Jack told her so), Ellen is confronted with not only the language barrier, but also with the cultural barrier of the superior-subordinate relationship and has to confront Jack and tell him to speak in English in order to keep the threats against the translator minimal and to ensure that she can understand the speech going forward. Another challenge this team is facing is an unclear leadership and direction which is causing interruptions in the decision making process. The misalignment between Jack’s and Ellen’s instructions causes inconsistencies and insecurities in the team. The Korean consultants are not sure which orders to follow and due to the cultural familiarity with Jack and the high power distance in the Korean work culture, they are ignoring Ellen’s instructions. The decision making process is further slowed down by major cultural difference in regards how and how quickly project related decisions are made. The American culture is known for quick decision-making whereas the Korean culture has a very high uncertainty-avoidance. This risk avoidant culture is driving Jack’s decision to conduct further market research even if that is outside of the scope of the companies deliverables. Since Korea is a collectivist society in which group decisions are valued, his unilateral decision in regards to the market research suggests that he does not view Ellen as part of the group. The differing attitudes toward hierarchy and authority make it very hard for the American consultants to gage what the knowledge of the team is and how much is really understood. The American culture has a very low-power distance compared to the high-power distance work culture of Korean’s. This is minimizing the knowledge and idea exchange which is very critical especially in consulting projects. Another major challenge is the missing group development. The Five Stage Model describes the first of these stages as the forming stage where team members get a feeling of how they fit into the team and what their responsibilities and tasks will be. Due to the constant disagreements and power struggles between Ellen and Jack, the group building process is majorly interrupted. No trust can be built between the team members and the leaders and will eventually cause the failure of the project. The last challenge is the low emotional and cultural intelligence in the group (EQ and CQ). In order for all members of the group to feel comfortable around the other members of the team, trust has to be developed and a sense of group identity and group efficacy has to be established. This would convey the efficiency and productivity of the team and the awareness of cultural differences. In this case, Ellen destroys the chance to get closer to an integrated group when she interrupts Jack during a meeting and makes him â€Å"lose his face† in front of his subordinates. In the Korean culture this is a huge sign of disrespect and she will be not able to regain trust or authority without any intervention from the management team. Q2: The 1st alternative would be to remove either Jack or Ellen from the team. Ellen’s removal would appease the Korean hierarchy and would give the team a unified leadership under Jack. Nevertheless, removing Ellen from the team would challenge the successful completion of the project since her expertise and experience is needed. Even if a suitable replacement for Ellen could be found, the person would need time to get up to speed and additional expenses would be occurred for the relocation package of the new person and a severance payment or relocation package for Ellen who would need to move to another project which most probably would be in a different country. This could possibly damage Andrew’s leadership and reputation. On the other hand, removing Jack from the project team would not be received well by the Korean consultants and the management team and the cultural differences would increasingly prohibit the project from succeeding. The 2nd alternative would be to keep status quo and leave the team as it is and let the situation take care of itself. The assumption here would be that Ellen has adjusted to different cultures in prior assignments and might be the best person to get the team back on track. The advantage of this solution would be that no initial cost is required and everybody continues in their role without major interruptions. The drawback with this solution is that this alternative is very risky. The team has already reached a point where action needs to be taken. The work environment and the tension between Ellen and Jack did not improve over the last weeks and additional resources will be needed to keep the project on track. The ultimate alternative in this case is to restructure and redefine the team. Ellen should be the sole team leader in regards to tasks, deadlines and milestones. Jack should be assigned to a specialized role on the consulting team, so that on the one hand his technical expertise is still available if needed, but on the other hand his control as a leader is decreased significantly, so he cannot interfere with the work flow of the team anymore. In order to make the restructuring of the team successful, Ellen should address the above mentioned challenges one by one, to ensure the highest possible success rate. In order to address the communication issue and the high-power distance work environment, she should establish an nvironment, where team members can anonymously state their opinion, ask questions or introduce new solutions to problems the team is currently facing. This could be established by creating an anonymous drop box (physically or digitally) which would be read daily by Ellen and topics submitted would be discussed during the meetings. For certain specialized tasks, subgroups should be created to make sure the high-power distance wo rk environment can be decreased and different viewpoints and ideas can arise from free discussions. This solution will improve team functionality and eliminate time lost on tasks not related to the project, preventing further delays. Furthermore Ellen would need to make the team aware of the cultural differences and try to make the team find common solutions which are acceptable to everybody (Adaption). Commonly agreed on procedures for office behavior or approval processes will make it easier for the employees to follow rules and to work efficiently. Team building sessions will be required to brainstorm team values, individual roles and decision making processes. This will eliminate the disconnect between leadership and subordinates while accelerating the group development. The demotion of Jack out of a management position will be potentially damaging to his reputation but will be counteracted by his new role as a specialized consultant with technical experience. The additional costs associated with the recommended solution are minimal. Nevertheless, gaining the buy-in of the Korean management team will be difficult. If the proposed solution does not work due to the missing of the Korean management team, Andrew would need to assume this position by himself.

A Short History of the Soviet and Russian Space Program

The modern age of space exploration exists largely because of the actions of two countries who competed to get the first people on the Moon: the United States and the former Soviet Union. Today, space exploration efforts include more than 70 countries with research institutes and space agencies. However, only a few of them have launch capability, the three largest being NASA in the United States, Roscosmos in the Russian Federation, and the European Space Agency. Most people know of the U.S.s space history, but the Russian efforts occurred largely in secrecy for many years, even when their launches were public. Only in recent decades has the full story of the countrys space exploration been revealed through detailed books and talks by former cosmonauts.   The Age of Soviet Exploration Begins The history of Russias space efforts starts with World War II. At the end of that huge conflict, German rockets and rocket parts were captured by both the U.S. and the Soviet Union. Both countries had dabbled in rocket science before that.  Robert Goddard in the U.S. had launched that countrys first rockets. In the Soviet Union, engineer Sergei Korolev had experimented with rockets, too. However, the chance to study and improve upon Germanys designs was attractive to both countries and they entered into the Cold War of the 1950s each striving to outdo the other into space. Not only did the U.S. bring over rockets and rocket parts from Germany, but they also transported a number of German rocket scientists to help with the fledgling National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) and its programs. The Soviets  captured rockets and German scientists, too, and eventually began experimenting with animal launches in the early 1950s, although none reached space. Yet, these were the first steps in the space race and set both countries on a headlong rush off Earth. The Soviets won the first round of that race when they put Sputnik 1 into orbit on October 4, 1957. It was a huge win for Soviet pride and propaganda and a major kick in the pants for the fledgling U.S. space effort. The Soviets followed up with the launch of the first man into space, Yuri Gagarin, in 1961. Then, they sent the first woman in space (Valentina Tereshkova, 1963) and did the first spacewalk, performed by Alexei Leonov in 1965. It looked very much like the Soviets might score the first man to the Moon, too. However, problems piled up and pushed back their lunar missions due to technical problems. Disaster in Soviet Space Disaster struck the Soviet program and gave them their first big setback. It happened in 1967 when cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov  was killed when the parachute that was supposed to settle his Soyuz 1 capsule gently on the ground failed to open. It was the first in-flight death of a man in space in history and a great embarrassment to the program. Problems continued to mount with the Soviet N1 rocket, which also set back planned lunar missions. Eventually, the U.S. beat the Soviet Union to the Moon, and the country turned its attention to sending unmanned probes to the Moon and Venus. After the Space Race In addition to its planetary probes, the Soviets got very interested in orbiting space stations, particularly after the U.S. announced (and then later canceled) its Manned Orbiting Laboratory. When the U.S. announced Skylab, the Soviets eventually built and launched the Salyut station. In 1971, a crew went to Salyut and spent two weeks working aboard the station. Unfortunately, they died during the return flight due to a pressure leak in their Soyuz 11 capsule. Eventually, the Soviets solved their Soyuz issues and the Salyut years led to a joint cooperation project with NASA on the Apollo Soyuz project. Later on, the two countries cooperated on a series of Shuttle-Mir dockings, and the building of the International Space Station (and partnerships with Japan and the European Space Agency). The Mir Years The most successful space station built by the Soviet Union flew from 1986 through 2001. It was called Mir and assembled on orbit (much as the later ISS was). It hosted a number of crew members from the Soviet Union and other countries in a show of space cooperation. The idea was to keep a long-term research outpost in low-Earth orbit, and it survived many years until its funding was cut. Mir is the only space station that was built by one countrys regime and then run by the successor to that regime. It happened when the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991 and formed the Russian Federation. Regime Change The Soviet space program faced interesting times as Union began to crumble in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Instead of the Soviet space agency, Mir and its Soviet cosmonauts (who became Russian citizens when the country changed) came under the aegis of Roscosmos, the newly formed Russian space agency. Many of the design bureaus that had dominated space and aerospace design were either shut down or reconstituted as private corporations. The Russian economy went through major crises, which affected the space program. Eventually, things stabilized and the country moved ahead with plans to participate in the International Space Station, plus resume launches of weather and communications satellites. Today, Roscosmos has weathered changes in the Russian space industrial sector and is moving ahead with new rocket designs and spacecraft. It remains part of the ISS consortium and has announced Instead of the Soviet space agency, Mir and its Soviet cosmonauts (who became Russian citizens when the country changed) came under the aegis of Roscosmos, the newly formed Russian Space Agency. It has announced interest in future lunar missions and is working on new rocket designs and satellite updates. Eventually, the Russians would like to go to Mars, as well, and continue solar system exploration.