ShantanuT01/DACTYL-Pretraining huggingface dataset:
When it comes to discussing whether it was necessary to drop atomic bombs on Japan’s cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August of 1945, it is important to take into account the specifics of geopolitical situation in the world, at the time. Nowadays, not many people aware of the fact that, prior to Germany’s attack on Soviet Union in 1941, the only purpose for Soviet state’s existence has been officially proclaimed spreading Communism all over the Earth. Right until USSR’s collapse in 1991, Soviet Constitution openly stated that it only the matter of time, before the rest of world’s countries would become Soviet republics. Therefore, Truman’s decision to subject Japan to atomic bombing was not as much motivated by considerations of military necessity as it was motivated by President’s determination not to allow Soviet Union to qualify for having an occupation zone in this country, after the end of war. According to Alperovitz (1996), throughout the summer of 1945, George Marshall never ceased stressing out namely the importance of intended bombing’s political implications: “[Marshall’s] insistence to me that whether we should drop an atomic bomb on Japan was a matter for the President to decide, not the Chief of Staff since it was not a military question…” (364). Nevertheless, it would be wrong to suggest that there were no purely military considerations behind President’s final decision to proceed with subjecting Japan to an atomic bombing. As the battles of Guadalcanal and Ivo Jima had shown, Japanese would very unlikely lay down their arms, even while facing the most impossible odds, associated with application of conventional warfare techniques. Therefore, occupying mainland Japan, in the manner that it was being done to Guadalcanal and Ivo Jima, would cost America dearly. This became particularly clear to America’s officials, after they heard of Japan’s reaction to Potsdam proclamation: “Japan’s first reaction to the Potsdam Proclamation came from the Domei News Agency… ‘Japan will prosecute the war of Greater East Asia to the bitter end” (Hasegawa, 168). Thus, at the time when Truman was making decision on whether to drop an atomic bomb on Japan, he was prompted to give the bombing go-ahead by consideration of preventing the spread of Communism into South Asia and by consideration of saving the lives of as many American soldiers as possible. In the end, these considerations outweighed the consideration of sparing the lives of Japanese civilians, especially given the fact that, during the course of war in Pacific, Japanese had proven themselves as people who did not regard their personal lives as representing a particularly high value. Therefore, given the qualitative essence of geopolitical realities at the time, Truman’s decision to proceed with the atomic bombing of Japan appears fully justified. If it was not up to this bombing, the war against Japan would have lasted for at least another year. Soviet Union would have obtained a justification to partake in occupation of Japan, which would eve
While the subject of care quality is usually focused on improving the delivery of care by providers and institutions, patients play a significant role in supporting high-quality care provision. Partnerships between patients and their care providers bring unique benefits to the care process and contribute to many other outcomes (Pomey, Hihat, Khalifa, Lebel, & Néron, 2015). Personally, I do not consider myself to be a difficult patient because I follow the standards of behavior during appointments, follow care providers’ requests and recommendations, and cooperate with them throughout the process of examination, diagnostics, and treatment. I believe that, in order to support care providers in delivering high-quality care, we should communicate with them clearly and openly. As explained by McLaughlin and Hays (2017), healthy communication between patients and providers is essential to ensuring patient safety and improving care outcomes. By concealing important details or refusing to share certain information with providers, patients put the quality of the care they receive at risk. Thus, patients should give all of the relevant details about their health to their care providers to get better quality care in return. I have seen patients disrupting the care environment on a number of occasions. Recently, when I was at a clinic, a woman who came in nearly 40 minutes late started yelling at the staff to let her see the doctor, even though he had already admitted the next patient. After several minutes, she proceeded to enter the exam room despite the staff’s protest, and nurses had to escort her out of the clinic. This disrupted the patient flow because care providers were distracted and tense. I think that, in order to prevent similar situations in the future, the clinic should have increased security oversight in the building and notify all late patients by phone that they will not be admitted if they arrive. This would help to minimize the number of angry patients while also enabling the clinic to remove them from the facility quickly.
The book offers a detailed description of the events that took place in the 1994 Rwandan genocide as told by the survivors of the massacre. According to Gourevitch (339), the genocide did not take the locals by surprise because there was every indication that a major war would inevitably break out. The author retells the ordeal of those who survived the tragic war period. He also reflects on the gist of the massacre throughout the book. Gourevitch derived the title of the book from the letter that was written to the Seventh-day Adventist Church’s president by the name Elizapham Ntakirutimana. The pastor was the head of operations of the church in the western parts of Rwanda. The letter was addressed to the pastor from other SDA pastors who were part of the Tutsi refugees in Kibuye prefecture within the neighborhood of Mugonero (Gourevitch 347). According to the author’s account of the events that took place after he received the letter, he must have significantly contributed in the mass killings that occurred the following day in the complex where the Tutsis were taking refuge. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda later convicted Ntakirutimana for crimes against humanity. The author doe not merely give account of the survivor’s experiences, he also document details on the genesis of the genocide including some of the factors that aggravated the situation. The Rwandan genocide clearly reminds me of what the world has witnessed in young democracies whereby negative ethnicity is used by tribal chiefs to ascend to power. Perhaps, Africa was never ready for democratic form of governance. The Hutu’s and Tutsi’s had lived harmoniously as brothers and sisters but were separated later by ethnic identity. Gourevitch is quite categorical that Rwanda has a historical perspective of stereotyping and demonization the Hutus and Tutsis. However, I do not think that the aforementioned vices could have escalated the violence to that level. For example, the author notes that hate speech in the media was promoted by Rwandese government courtesy of RTLM station which demonised the Tutsi by spreading propaganda about the Tutsi-led Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). The latter claimed the Tutsi’s were devils who were horrible to their victims and also claimed that all Tutsis were RPF members. A faction of the Hutus formed the government. Some of them promoted the use of anti-Tutsi rhetoric for their own gain (Gourevitch 326). An example of such prejudice was the ‘Hutu’s ten commandments’ which were published in the journal Kangura and consisted of such sentiments as “any Muhutu who marries, makes friends with, or employs a Tutsi woman as secretary or concubine will be considered a traitor”(Gourevitch 321). Furthermore, the United Nations operations in Rwanda before and during the genocide were largely controlled by both the US and UK. These nations were always considered to be opportunists since they were determined to interfere with the local forces. Although the author has given first-hand account of the genocide as well as his personal reflection, it appears that the cause and progress of the genocide ha
When a new president is elected, he will surely need to face many tribulations from the opponents. It is a usual occurrence which can be seen in every country. In America too, one can see this issue. When one goes through this state of affairs, he can really see that it is not because of racism that the Americans truly hate their new president. The author Steve Chapman asks: “Does that suggest, as Jimmy Carter insists, that their true motivation lies in racism?” (Race and the Opposition to Obama, para.1). The author Steve Chapman opines that it is not because of racism the people in America really hate their president. The author says that it is not about a particular president Barack Obama he is speaking about and if so, the readers can think likewise, but instead, here the author speaks about Bill Clinton and George W. Bush too. Even they did not escape from the public’s opposition and it was because of the illegitimate acts they were ill-treated. The best example which the author demonstrates to prove this state of affairs is 2001’s America’s inauguration day. It was on this occasion “Bush was greeted by thousands of protesters who threw eggs and bottles, made obscene gestures and carried signs jeering, “Hail to the thief” — a reference to the legal fight needed to settle the outcome of the election” (Race and the Opposition to Obama, para.3). The protesters were of the view that Bush was the authentic opponent of the democratic system. The case of Clinton was not far better than Bush’s as he had been even impeached by the American constitution. The very reality which Obama failed to be conscious of until he reached his position was about the general issue that “hating president” is still sustained around the American public. They even lay blame on the great leaders like Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, and so on. So, the author is of the view that when Barack Obama is being opposed by the public, one cannot turn his attention towards his race. One can say that the real reason for the opposition is their ruling strategy. Even being a democratic ruler, the president in America cannot be free from the opponents and it is best seen when one goes through Clinton’s view about his own experience in America. Likewise, Obama too faces such criticism but it is not because of his color; if so, Bush would not have been ill-treated by the American public. According to Steve Chapman, it is his guiding principle that makes him an opponent. The opinion of the author is correct because if the people hate Barack Obama due to his race and opposition, they should adore Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, but the people hated Bill Clinton and George W. Bush also. Not only in America, in any country, even though the president is elected by the people, but they also may not have the same opinion on all the judgments o
Introduction Persecution of Christianity is believed to be one of the most notable aspects connected to the life of the Roman Empire. Nevertheless, this question needs further research that will allow for the evaluation of the situation and conclude whether popular assumptions related to the topic are close to reality. Discussion To begin with, it is necessary to understand why the Romans cared about the Christians and what the reasons were for this attitude. Thus, it is important to mention that religious beliefs are a reason for conflicts and crimes even now, and they are primarily used to unite people and force them to share the same values (Crone 125). It cannot be denied that religion can be a good weapon as those people who can be regarded as strong believers usually do everything they can to live by the assumptions and rules prescribed by their religion. Therefore, it is quite easy to make such people take part in battles if they think that it is necessary to protect their beliefs and do the will of God. At the same time, those people participating in conflicts connected to religious beliefs do not seem to understand that the “innocence” of one religion and “wrong” beliefs peculiar to another one are nothing more than excuses for a race for power. In the period we are discussing, religion was one of the primary factors uniting people. Thus, in conditions of the constant battle over resources, there was a need to crush another group of people sharing common views to prevent them from uniting and strengthening their influence in the territory. As for the kind of persecution that was administered by the Roman government, it is possible to state that the aggression was aimed at preventing the bishops from spreading the ideas peculiar to the Christian religion. By persecuting the bishops, the Romans made it possible to intimidate other Christians and decrease the danger of revolts and protests. The persecution was caused by many reasons: The Romans understood that it was important to influence Christians to make them deny their ideas. The Christians’ unwillingness to comply with the rules was considered as a crime against religion. A lot of measures were taken to differentiate between the groups; to punish the person, it was necessary to prove that he or she was a Christian. Speaking about the division of power in
Rivethead by Ben Hamper broadly covers the author’s experience when he worked at General Motors (GM) cars and trucks in Flint Michigan for many years as a vehicle assembler. The book provides a historical background of the author and the author’s professional family lineage. Ben Hamper came from a succession of auto workers and their vocational engagement dates back to the mid nineteenth century. The author was performing in a less than average way while in high school; meaning he was not a viable candidate for university or collage admission after high school. This left him with no option but to work for General Motors as a vehicle assembler since this was a popular job for most men that hailed from the author’s home area. The book records a booming period for organized labor which was however riddled with inconsistencies. Organizational insights revealed in Rivethead by Ben Hamper Special insights and subtle revelations of the nature of the organizational world are abounding in “Rivethead” by Ben Hamper (Fineman 23). The book reveals that the organization had a categorical arrangement which in most cases was not cohesive enough to effectively run a profitable yet contented and productive organization (Yates 3). A number of organizational successes are also subtly outlined in the book, but the author takes most of the time discussing the organizational dynamics of General Motors (Hamper 2). Reluctant organizational structures Ben Hamper helps the reader recognize the relaxed nature in which organizations monitor their workers (Yates 5). When hamper starts working for GM, he learns to quickly navigate the ranks and he is assigned to simple jobs (Meyer 2). Hamper realized that the work was so easy that he could do his job as well as his partner’s at the same time, leaving his partner free to do whatever he wanted. The author and his partner alternated their duties and thus encouraging truancy. The author spent his free time in a bar and this was also a routine that was common with his partner. Both of them would still receive their pay as well as any bonuses even though neither of them was applying their full input at work. Organizational neglect and mismanagement There was a high rate of drug and alcohol abuse during working hours which went unreported or was ignored by the management. Eventually the American automobile industry and in particular General Motors obtained an appalling reputation for substandard workmanship and poor management. There were several deaths and mutilations in the mid twentieth century that were caused by faulty cars and car parts which were obviously mishandled by the assembly plant workers (Meyer 4). The author helps the reader identify the organizational mismanagement of the workers at all tiers of the work place (Hamper 4). The workers that were res
Historical background to Multiple Intelligences Intelligence is a concept that its use dates back to the 19 th century. The term first appeared in the scholastic philosophy of Aristotle to describe cognitive and mental differences in human race (Gögebakan, 2003). Since then, many scholars have conducted studies using different theoretical positions to understand the abstract concept of intelligence in its practical sense. While studying individual differences in the late 1800s, Francis Galton argued that intelligence required a more direct underlying measure to be able to explain the perceived individual differences, hence his suggestion of reaction time to understand the difference in sensori-motor measurements resulting to factor analysis of intelligence (“Key Players in the History of Intelligence,” 2005). Guided by Galton’s approach, Spearman (1904) conceptualized a single general dimension of intelligence “g”, which included all components of intellectual pursuits (as cited in Intelligence-Historical background, 2011). From his observations of various mental tests and school performance measures, Spearman concluded that all mental test measures are common and the results vary depending on people’s general ability. Spearman later adjusted his single dimension conceptualization of intelligences into a two-factor dimension, i.e., general ability “g” and special ability in 1927. His observation was that people who are gifted in general ability are also gifted in special ability (“Key Players in the History of Intelligence,” 2005). Just like his predecessor, Spearman’s conceptualization of intelligence was widely accepted and provided the main test for intelligence in the early 20 th century. Binet and Simon (1905) conducted the first empirical study on intelligence using Spearman’s single general dimension of intelligence (as cited in Denig, 2004). Arguing that intelligence is measurable, they came up with a number of questions and used them as a test of intelligence (Denig, 2004). However, their study was criticized since it only focused on psychological abilities ability hence could not explain the perceived scholarly differences. Binet and Simon later revised their work in 1916 to incorporate the concept of mental age and concluded that intelligence varies depending on mental age (Gögebakan, 2003). Unlike their first study, their revised study was widely accepted in the U.S. and Europe. In a similar study, Lewis Terman adopted Binet and Simon’s work to develop his famous Stanford-Binet test for use in American schools in 1916 (Intelligence-Historical background, 2011). He, however, introduced the concept of IQ in his Stanford-Binet test to act as a measure of cognitive capability with reference to a person’s age and hence allow for
This paper is based on Mark Twain’s famous essay called “The Lowest Animal”. The well known American writer and author of great novels about the adventures of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn has demonstrated a new side of himself in this essay. Twain is known for his sharp philosophical mind and clever ironical humor. His works are loved and admired by people all over the world; both children and adults read his books and enjoy them. “The Lowest Animal” Is different from other works of Mark Twain. It appeared after the death of the author in 1910 to show Mark Twain’s readers that the writer had a darker side (Nordquist, par. 1). The essay was written as a reaction to a conflict between Muslims and Christians in Crete. Twain speaks harshly about human behavioral patterns, psychology and morals. He states that moral sense of humans and understanding of what is right and what is wrong actually enables humans to do the worst things. I agree that the main focus of all religions was to create the rules of moral behavior for humans and prevent us from making bad choices, but it has obviously worked in the opposite direction. Unfortunately, the only power able to stop humans from doing bad things is their own mind. Human mind is considered much more powerful than minds of all other animals, yet this mind is what encourages us to do the worst things. Human mind is the source of the best decisions and achievements as well as the most horrifying disasters. Knowing what is wrong is not enough to stay away from making mistakes. I am talking not only about accidents; I mean actual bad choices like lying, cheating, hurting, taking revenge, punishing and offending. Why do so many people pleasure themselves in taking revenge? Every single one of us is aware that doing this wrong and bad and it is going to hurt someone, yet we still do it. We are being self-centered, we are allowing ourselves to judge and decide what is fair and what is not. Twain notices that humans are able to harbor insults and then wait for the best chance to take revenge (2). We do unnecessary things we could simply avoid doing just because it is pleasant for us to see someone else suffer. This is just one of many peculiarities of human mind. Avoiding the temptations and leading a proper forgiving and peaceful lifestyle is considered extremely difficult, this is why only few people choose to walk this path. We call them monks. They live in groups or alone far away from the rest of the society, restricted by many laws and rules; they avoid penetrating the society in order not to obtain the wrong morals by mistake. This example is perfect to demonstrate that even the most religious people are unable to control their human minds fully and avoid letting their emotions take over. In his essay Mark Twain compares human behavior and way of think to the behavior of animals that are widely considered a more primitive form of life. However, as Twain discovers, in most cases animals make right choices simply