Capital punishment Essay Example for Free

Capital punishment Essay In every society there are laws that define what acts are considered crime. These laws also provide for the imposable penalty for their violation. The purpose of which is to maintain order within the community. Though there may not be rewards for compliance and observance with these laws, there are always punishment for their violation. Punishment is the effect of a violation of a law enacted by the duly constituted authorities of the state. Punishment can either be the payment of fine and indemnities for injuries caused. It could also be imprisonment of the individual which may last for several days or for several years or the imposition of what is considered as the ultimate form of punishment – capital punishment. This essay seeks to focus on the issue of capital punishment as the state’s response for the violation of its laws against capital crimes. Some argue against the imposition of capital punishment because it is mainly arbitrary while some argue in favor of capital punishment. I aim to discuss the arguments for and against capital punishment. In the concluding portion, I aim to take a stand on this issue. Capital Punishment Capital Punishment is defined as the execution of a convicted criminal by the state as punishment for crimes known as capital crimes or capital offences (â€Å"Capital Punishment†) It is also known as death penalty. The formal execution of individuals for violation of communal rules had always been practiced ever since the beginning of our history. Even when there were still no formal written laws, execution had always been a part of the communal justice system. This was used to regulate the behavior of the members of the community. This is usually imposed by the tribal leader against those who violate the laws of the tribe. Even in the past decades, capital punishment was still being practiced for those convicted of a particular crime. To date, capital punishment is still imposed by some countries, though fewer countries are imposing it. For those countries which still practice it, the trend today is the movement towards a less painful and more humane executions. Hanging and Guillotine which were being practiced before were gradually replaced by electrocution and gas chamber and later the lethal injection. (John J. Patrick, Richard M. Pious Donald A. Ritchie, p. 2) Arguments against Capital Punishment The main argument against capital punishment is that it is arbitrary. Perhaps, the strongest support for this argument is found in the Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution which states that: â€Å"No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. † It is the argument of the Abolitionists that capital punishment is tantamount to torture. It is cruel and inhuman. Further, citing Black’s Law Dictionary, they argue that capital punishment fits the definition of an arbitrary punishment since it is imposed in an unreasonable manner or it is something which is done at the pleasure, whims and caprices of the government authorities. Supporting this premise are studies which are cited by the Death Penalty Information Center. It is said that in a comprehensive study covering 20 years and thousands of capital cases in Ohio, the Associated Press found that the death penalty has been applied in an uneven and often arbitrary fashion. Offenders facing a death penalty charge for killing a white person were twice as likely to go to death row than if they had killed a black victim. Death sentences were handed down in 18% of cases where the victims were white, compared with 8. 5% of cases where victims were black. † (â€Å"Major Study Finds Arbitrary Application of Death Penalty, 2007) Arguments in Favor of Capital Punishment On the other hand, the retentionists argue that the US Supreme Court has already spoken on this issue and has already ruled on its constitutionality. As the highest court of our country, it is but proper that we give deference to their ruling. Initially, in the case of Furman v Georgia (408 US 238), the Supreme Court declared that the imposition and carrying out of the death penalty constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment. However in the latter case of Gregg v Georgia (428 US 153) the Supreme Court reversed itself and ruled that death penalty does not violate the US Constitution. It cannot be said that capital punishment is arbitrary because it is imposed only in cases of heinous crimes which are specifically defined by the legislature. It cannot be imposed for any other crime. Further, before capital punishment is finally imposed to a convicted prisoner, he must go through the usual lengthy process of prosecution and conviction. It must be stressed that even if the accused is convicted by the lower courts, once the case goes up on appeal to the United States Supreme Court the case may still be reversed if the court finds that the state fails to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Thus, the defendant only has to instill doubt in the mind of the court to avoid capital punishment. It only goes to show that before the conviction is affirmed by the appellate court or the United States Supreme Court, they must have found strong and convincing evidence that the accused indeed has committed a heinous crime. Further, capital punishment as a penalty is imposed to all those prisoners who may be found to have committed a heinous crime. It is imposed regardless of one’s color, race, sex, financial capacity or social status. If there appears to be discrimination in its imposition, then the proper response would be to correct the error and not by abolishing the whole system of capital punishment. It cannot likewise be said that capital punishment amounts to torture or that it is cruel because any infliction of pain in capital punishment is merely incidental in carrying out the death penalty. Capital punishment does not fall within the constitutional prohibition against cruel, degrading and inhuman punishment. It may be said that anything that results in pain is cruel. But this does not that crime will go unpunished. The cruelty which the Eighth Amendment speaks of here is cruelty which is inherent in the method of punishment and not merely the suffering that is involved in any method employed to extinguish life humanely. In sum, capital punishment is not merely an act of violence imposed by the state. Rather, it is imposed by a legitimate authority based on a law passed by the Legislative Branch of our government. Capital punishment is not cruel and inhuman neither does it violate the fundamental human rights. Rather, it is the ultimate punishment for those who have severely disregarded the value of human life.

Personal Experience: A Caring Occurrence

Personal Experience: A Caring Occurrence The purpose of this reflective paper is to reflect on a personal experience in which you cared for someone. Using Johns model (Johns 2006), the reflection will explore how the personal experience reflected a caring occurrence. Reflection is the appearance of experiential knowledge and as nursing students; we should begin to use reflection as our experience in the nursing field accumulates. It is both justified and recommended that Carpers work be incorporated into reflective practice since it was a key figure in widening knowledge in nursing (Heath, 1998). Reflective practice incorporates Carpers (1978) ways of knowing personal, ethical, aesthetical and empirical knowing into an individuals reflection. Reflection is a personal understanding of self and in the development of self, reflecting on relationships and interactions between two or more people. As a nurse, the relationship is between the nurse and the client, and sometimes involves the clients family as well. The experience in which I cared for someone occurred in the fall of 2009. As part of my Gr. 12 Ethics and Morals Religion Class, it was required that for an eight week period, we spent a period of our time, once a week at a retirement home with our assigned adoptive grandparent. The purpose of this assignment was to spend time with an older adult, engage in communication, participation, and enjoy the time spent with the older generation and learn from them. So once a week, I made my way to the retirement home and spent an hour and a half with my adoptive grandparent Blanche. I planned ahead of time activities that she might like to take part in such as a puzzle, a walk, a craft, or baking. Once I got there, I would ask her what she would like to do and we would go from there. Each time I went there, she had a different story to tell me; her life as a young farm girl, her teenage years, and the love of her life, her career as a teacher, her family and journeys she had been on. Each st ory had its own personal meaning to her and I sat there attentively and listened, asked probing questions and comments. As her adopted grandchild, it was my duty to entertain her, keep her spirits up and encourage her. The one week when I went there, she had physiotherapy so I could not spend much time with her on a personal level, but more of a team of caring individuals to support her, and encourage her through her therapy. Although this situation does not exactly relate to a medical need for caring for someone, I still managed to care for an individual on a personal, face-to-face encounter. This experience also helped me to learn how important the elderly patients are. When I experienced this caring situation, I was feeling worried and nervous at first. I was unsure what to expect prior to meeting my adoptive grandparent. I was worried about the fact that my grandparent might not have liked me, or would be extremely quiet and held back. Since this was one of the first times I would be put in an experience like this, I just did not know what to expect. After the first two weeks, I became more comfortable in my surroundings and each week I would then look forward to my visits with Blanche. After I became comfortable, I was happy and opened up more towards Blanche. The purpose of this experience achieved a new found friendship with a member of the older generation. It gave me the opportunity to care for an individual at the retirement home who did not have many visitors, so I became her weekly visitor and spent quality time with her and card for her in a special way. This experience helped me achieve a better respect for the elderly and enhanced my ab ility to relate to them on a personal level. Knowledge that may have informed me would be the calling for a special person who cares for the spirituality of others. Nursing is a caring profession that is honoured as the spiritual, spirit-filled practice (Vance, 2003). A caring occasion becomes transpersonal when nurse and client together with their unique life histories and perception become a focal point, in which the moment is greater than the occasion itself (Watson, 2008). The experience shared between the two becomes a deeper pattern in life. The caring moment is being in the moment. Fully present, open to other people, compassion and connection. Reflection of practice allows the nurse to observe decisions made and bring to the open the knowledge that has formed from practicing skills. Nursing students can enhance multiple ways of knowing and their understanding of caring through the process of reflecting on caring encounters (Schaefer, 2002). The foundation of nurse care is the wisdom in knowing and understanding that les sons are learned by one another to become more human in learning the identity of ourselves with others. When I cared for Blanche on a weekly basis, I acted for the best with the values that I had at the time. Although I had not dealt with many elderly patients prior to this experience, I still knew the values I had and gave Blanche my utmost respect. I treated her with the same respect that I would have liked to be treated if the positions were opposite. Caring as a nurse means the innermost of nursing, without prejudice and aims at prioritizing the patients suffering and needs (Gustafsson et al., 2007). Nursing care is the process aimed at responding to patients needs without reasoning. Quality care is the element to caring. When a nurse is caring for someone, it is best that they are not bias towards the patient, nurses should treat all patients equally, meaning not giving certain patients more attention, unless their critical situation demands it of them. This situation connects with a previous experience in which I worked at a retirement home for a few weeks in the summer. This position mainly had me as house cleaning but in the evening when everything was done, it allowed me to interact with the residents. I talked to them, played games and took them for a stroll outside. The experience in which I cared for Blanche was more connected and personal in terms of the one-on-one time I was able to spend with her. The idea of reflection is caring science learning, learning and developing a personal knowledge of caring as an art (Gustafsson et al., 2007). This helps to establish the substance and quality of caring in regards to the patient. Factors that constrain my responding in new ways is my personal confidence level, with a variation of the knowledge of my experience, which I will hope to gain from working side-by-side with experience nurse practitioners. This also relates to my level of involvement, if I increase the questions I ask if I am in doubt, I will gain more knowledge of the situation. This will also offer clarification and a deeper level of thought in regards to the situation. When I was caring for Blanche, at first I was not very confident and a little hesitant to introducing myself to a complete stranger and spending time with her once a week. After participating in this learning of a life lesson, I gained so much from it. I have more confidence in my ability to communicate with strangers; I have stepped outside the box I built up around myself and have become a more confident, strong, communicative leader. Although I may still be a little hesitant about situations, that is normal. A fear of the unknown or hesitation is another constraint to responding in new ways. This unknowing is an awareness that as a nurse does not and cannot know or understand the client when they first meet (Heath, 1998). Knowing the clients information or background prior to meeting with the patient will help make the situation a little more comfortable. Mixed groups may possibly enhance the development of skills of reflection (Heath, 1998). Working together as a team will help form and ensure actions are for the best. As a team, all sides are valued and reflection is more in-depth and has different vantage points. As a student nurse, insights that I have gained from this reflection is that my experience will grow and I can begin to understand the details of what experienced nurses know. It may only be a small portion, but I can build an understanding for the knowledge expert nurses have and benefit from it. A powerful insight is recognizing the unknown, and as a nurse, I can learn to remain alert to the clients individual viewpoint of the situation. This can best be done by listening to the client and establishing a truthful, open, working relationship, without the state of unknowing. Nurses need to be aware of the lack of empirical knowledge (Heath, 1998). This will promote an awareness to learn, research and increase practical skills. Guided reflection is a journey of self-inquiry and transformation (Johns, 2006). Reflection helps one realize their ability to care, learn and gain experience on past situations, learn from mistakes so they do not happen again. Reflection is awakening of the se lf (Johns, 2006). Did I act or be the best I could be with Blanche? I personally feel that I did the best job I could with the knowledge I had at the time. After learning about nurse- client therapeutic communication, I feel that maybe now, if I were to go back and relive the experience, I would be have a better relationship with her and gain more knowledge and become an even better adopted grandchild. I would ensure that the relationship would be more purposeful and contain a position of trust and a unique responsibility to maintain a therapeutic relationship. What would I have done differently if I was able to relive this experience to improve and make the most of this experience for both myself and Blanche? If I were to relive this experience, I would change the direction of advancing the best outcome and interest for Blanche. I would give her more attention, make more time in my schedule to spend time with her and take pleasure in the time spent together. Just because I may understand something, d oes not mean that I could change the outcome, it just means I am on my way to changing and becoming a more determined nurse. Understanding something is the first step towards changing. As John (2006) states, usually negative feelings such as anger, guilt, frustration and sadness draw our attention to the experience. These negative feelings draw specific attention because they seem disturbed and usual taken-for-granted awareness for feelings. In my situation while I was caring for my adopted grandparent, this was not the case. If anything, it was the opposite. The feelings that drew my attention to this caring situation were happiness, thoughtfulness, joy, and understanding. The smile I saw every time I walked into Blanches room and glow in her eyes every time she saw us. Our weekly visits to her brightened her days and made her feel young again. I appreciated being with her, giving her my time, my attention and my skill as a person of todays generation. It takes practice first and then reflection (Johns, 2006). It is best to practice the skills needed first, make sure they are understood and demonstrated them properly and then reflect on the occasion and what went right and what went wrong and improve the situation for the next time.

Is Rawlss Critique Of Utilitarianism Fair Philosophy Essay

Is Rawlss Critique Of Utilitarianism Fair Philosophy Essay The question we are going to deal with immediately draw my attention; as Rawls work on justice not only turns out to be theoretically relevant, but even particular considering the time it was published, it results being determinant from a historic point of view. Indeed A theory of justice was written in 1971, in these years as we know cold war reached its climax and contrast between the Soviet Union and the United States was severe. These conflicts implied not only a political (and fortunately not military) conflict, but at its deepest layer a difference in ideology, beliefs, thought. As well known the soviet model had its roots in Karl Marxs (1818-1883) communist philosophy while the western countries found their attachment mostly in utilitarianism. These philosophies oppose in its assumptions and appear not to be compatible witch each other. What Rawls proposes us is an innovating solution to conjugate social justice and utilitarianism in an innovating if not revolutionary theory of justice. He is considered to be the father of the third way among a centralized economy and laissez-faire. As previously anticipated the theory of justice also has a fundamental theoretical value as it marks the turning point in some very important and discussed conceptual differences which became part of nowadays political agenda. Rawls famous theory of justice criticized utilitarianism at its roots. After a brief introduction about the topic of discussion, my attention is going to focus on the basic ideas of utilitarianism as it is the philosophical theory which opposes most to Rawls theory of justice. We will then analyze Rawls attack to utilitarian philosophy as explained in his book: A theory of justice. Furthermore we will place our attention on the reasons why Rawlss judges utilitarianism wrong, and on other arguments against it. John Rawlss thought John Rawls is widely considered one of the most innovative and influential thinker of the twentieth century. Put in Amartya Sens words:By far the most influential and I believe the most important theory of justice to be presented in this century has been John Rawls Justice as fairness (Sen, 1992:p. 75) He was born in 1921 in the city of Baltimore, made his studies in Princeton and Oxford, before becoming a professor in one of the most known universities of the United States: Harvard. He is mostly known through his famous book A theory of justice (1971). The philosopher claims that justice is the first requisite of social institutions, just in the same way as the pursuit of truth is the final aim of any philosophy. His basic claim is that as a theory a needs to be discarded or at least changed in its missing parts if it is not true, in the same way institutions or laws have to be abolished or reformed if they are not fair. He goes on saying that even if society as a whole might profit from certain institution, they cannot be accepted and left in place if even only one person gets an unfair treatment as a consequence of their operation. Each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare of society as a whole cannot override. For this reason justice denies that the loss of freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others. It does not allow that the sacrifices imposed on a few are outweighed by the larger sum of advantages enjoyed by many.( Rawls, John A Theory of Justice  (Belknap Press of Harvard University Press), 1971, p 3.) As he defined his idea about justice, he wanted to give a rational foundation to it. He wanted to ensure that his justice assumptions were rational and shared by all members of society. Given the fact that individuals are different and have different aims in life it is necessary to find some principle which could be agreed on by all members. The way by which people could find a general agreement is very well known in philosophy and social sciences as public law. What is being referred to is the idea of original position and veil of ignorance. Part of its great success is due to the fascinating representation given by the author. He imagines a so called original position in which the single individuals decide the rules which will govern society. What is crucial is the fact that they do this choice in absolute ignorance concerning some relevant information of their future lives in society. The agreement is so being made in a condition of a veil of ignorance. This avoids the fact that some which might be born in a very rich family would obviously be against high income taxes to transfer some wealth to the worse off. The poor one on the other hand would definitely welcome such taxes as they could profit from them. The people making the choice are thus presented as rational and not interested in others. No one could get an advantage from the choice of certain principles which would advantage a certain category, as they would not know which role they are going to have in society. To sum up we can say that the veil of ignorance has to exclude people from the knowledge of facts which would bring them to have conflicts. Al the parties are equal in this position, indeed everyone would have the same rights in proposing rules and accepting them. The outcome of this decision leads to a fair agreement because it is conducted in fair conditions. This is the reason why this theory is known as justice as fairness. He states that the philosopher which contributed most to the development of his theory has been Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), since Kants ethic is based on the personal choice of free, rational and equal individuals. Therefore he arrives to claim that the principles of justice are to be seen as categorical imperatives in the Kantian way. Indeed by categorical imperative Kant means these moral principles which are to be rationally respected and accepted from a free and rational individual. Opposed to these we find hypothetical imperatives which are the ones which aim at certain specific goals. Concerning the principles which have to be expected from the decision take under the veil of ignorance, we should not consider them as defined principles for actions but as general guide lines for practical political decisions. It is to be noticed that some critics might emerge at this point, authors like Sen criticized the fact that exactly these principles would emerge from the contracting under the veil of ignorance: The outcome might be a different one. The first principle states the following: Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others. (Rawls, 1971) What is exactly meant as basic liberties has to be defined more precisely, indeed they are: a) The active and passive right to vote; the first refers to the possibility to choose a political actor according to our preferences (what is commonly understood as right to vote). The second one (passive right to vote) refers to the fact that we have the possibility to candidate for elections and possibility be elected. b) Liberty of conscience, which is basically the faculty to choose or decide by your own, your future life, your way of being and your own destiny. c) Freedom of speech and assembly, so the possibility to express your own ideas and make them public even if they do not fit and are not coherent with the current political situation and its majoritys ideas. The freedom of assembly indeed refers to the possibility to arrange political assemblies to discuss political and practical issues. d) Freedom to personal propriety, which is to be understood as the possibility to have the personal private propriety on your goods (although he states that the private propriety of means of production is not necessarily to be seen as a primary good). e) Freedom from arbitrary arrest, which means the fact that the public power has not the freedom to arbitrary (so without a reason), arrest individuals because they might oppose or disagree with the public power itself. The second principle: Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that (a) They are to be of the greatest benefit of the least-advantaged members of society, consistent with the just savings principle (the difference principle). (b) Offices and positions must be open to everyone under conditions of  fair equality of opportunity (Rawls, 1971, p.302) The first part of the second principle (a) holds the idea that the first goal in a choice should be to maximize the least well off rather than to maximize in general. (Maximin) This means that arrangements which imply inequalities might only be accepted if they increase the position of the poorest too. It is well explained by this graphical representation: C:Documents and SettingsRoberta SimeoneDesktoprawls function.jpg This graph is to be interpreted as if there were two individuals; giving freedom to our imagination let us call them: 1 and 2. The social utility of both is to be measured on the 45 degree line in the point of interception with the L curve. A few of them are marked in increasing utility order to give a general idea, I Already this argument (Maximin) proves the effectiveness of Rawls critique to utilitarianism because it gives attention to the distribution of wealth rather than considering merely the sum of all the agents utilities. This will be clear in the paragraph about utilitarianism. The justification for this argument is due to the fact that the randomness of the condition in which one is born is not linked to a moral entitlement. For instance the financial conditions of ones family or even the talents one has are merely casual. That is why it is right to increase first the worse off who had been unlucky in the lottery of life. Utilitarianism Utilitarianism was mainly born by Jeremy Benthams (1748-1832) work. His biggest innovation compared to previous thinkers was to found moral philosophy on a rational basis. This reflects the theoretical innovations of his time, which is the scientific method brought by enlightenment. He therefore tried to make ethics an analytical science which can be proven by logical and mathematical principles. This philosophy is founded on the basic idea that actions should only be judged from the value of its outcome. The key point if we assume this way of thinking, becomes to define precisely how we might value the effects of our actions. We could try to value different things which we generally assumed as good, such as happiness, satisfaction, wealth or even simple pleasure. Not giving any value judgment about this methodology to chose the right action, it is already possible to note that this part is particularly problematic as all these things turn out to be extremely difficult (if not impossible) to measure. The general principle is the so called utility, according to utilitarian philosophers it can be measured by calculation and thus it allows us to compare between actions leading to higher and lower utility outcomes. Bentham believes it is possible to possible to calculate pain and pleasure by using equations, this should be the way to define utility according to the duration and the strength of a feeling (positive or negative). Founding this principle of utility is a general assumption believed to be true by utilitarianism, it is the fact that any activity leads to two basic feelings, which are pleasure and its opposite: pain. Judgment about how to act should only be left to these two. In Benthams words: that property in any object, whereby it tends to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or happinessorto prevent the happening of mischief, pain, evil, or unhappiness  (Jeremy Bentham Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation  ,1789). As we saw in this paragraph this basic understanding of utilitarianism does not allow us to go beyond a personal, individualistic judgment. How should indeed societys utility be considered? The definition of utility states that it should be considered compared to the part whose interest is concerned. If we consider society as the interested party which might be societys interest? In this philosophy social utility is simple: the sum of all individuals utilities. (As we saw, Rawls position criticizes exactly this simplicity by which utilitarianism simplifies individuals and the general social utility. Which effectively is a fair argument against it). An individualistic approach by which each person maximizes its own utility does not appear to be compatible with collective utility. The way utilitarian philosophers think that it is possible to enforce public interest is trough legislation as a tool, the law should define the principles society wants to respect and the actions which maximize social utility. A well planned legislation will lead to harmonize individual interest to social one by making obedience to laws more convenient than breaking it. This means that the expected utility of committing an action against the law should be lower than the possible advantage to commit a crime. Indeed Bentham tried to find a way to define particularly the penal code, in this way anyone would know the punishment applied for breaking the law which would be leading to a lower utility than respecting it. To give another graphical representation to be compared to the Rawlsian one we can have a look at the following graph: C:Documents and SettingsRoberta SimeoneDesktopUtilità  ut.jpg Again we have our 1 and 2 (individuals) determining social utility, the parallel lines have again a slope of 45 degrees this time turned through 90 degrees. The social utility is on the interception where the two individual ones cross. We can note the fact that even if one has all and the other any (interception between x axis u1 and W1) we still stay on the same social utility: W1. Critical points in utilitarianism Utilitarianism was all but left without critics, already Benthams successor John Stuart Mills (1806-1873) who was the second innovator in utilitarianism started to criticize different approaches and assumption used by Bentham. Indeed Benthams approach used to be focused on the theory by which the public actor should act. Mills on the other hand was focusing more on the personal morality of actions. Compared to Bentham he assumes an approach which is more internal, he tries to focus on the psychology of the agent. Here we find the first critic to utilitarianism; Mills believes utility maximization assumption to be too narrow to explain agents choices. An interesting critique is the one moved by Bernard Williams (1929-2003) it is well explained by an anecdote by Williams himself known as Jim and the Indians: Jim finds himself in the central square of a small South American town. Tied up against the wall are twenty Indians, in front of several armed men in uniform. A heavy man in a sweat-stained khaki shirt turns out to be the captain in charge and () explains that the Indians are a random group of inhabitants who, after recent acts of protest against the government, are just about to be killed to remind other possible protesters of the advantage of not protesting. However, since Jim is an honoured visitor from another land, the captain is happy to offer him a guests privilege of killing one of the prisoners himself. If Jim accepts, then as a special mark of the occasion the other Indians will be let off. Of course, if Jim refuses, there will be no special occasion, and the captain will do what he was about to and kill them all. () The men are against the wall and the other villagers understand the situation and are obviously begging him to accept. What should he do? (B. Williams, A Critique of Utilitarianism in Smart Williams, Utilitarianism: For and Against, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1973) Since utilitarianism only considers the utility of the outcome of an action there is no choice. It is much better in terms of general utility to kill only one person rather than having 19 others been killed. This would simply be better because utilitarianism considers that each one counts for one and only one. What Williams argues is different: that it is not the same consequence if a person is killed by my direct action or if he is killed because of my indirect behavior, which in this case would be an act of not taking participation. Killing actively one person would not preserve our personal moral integrity because indeed we would have killed a human being. This would harm our own personal moral integrity even though it might be a better outcome in terms of social utility. That is the reason why this objection is known as the integrity objection. Rawls critique Rawls position is deeply against utilitarianism, as this philosophy is accepting to give up individual interests for majoritys ones. The utilitarian assumption that individual interest might be given up for society, is criticized even if the sacrifice of someones interest might lead to greater efficiency. For Rawls it is more important to ensure justice before efficiency. It is claimed to be wrong if the majority would get an advantage but the one who has to take the sacrifice is the worst of, and this is unjust. Accordingly, in a just society we have to assume equal citizen rights, which again according to him are an absolute right under any circumstance. The only admissible injustice would be the one which would prevent a worse injustice. The first critical point of utilitarianism he identifies is the fact that it tends to make the individual disappear. Utilitarianism has a very narrowed view of human beings only considering its utility, to the point that once the individual utility is calculated there is no other relevant information concerning the person. This kind of reduction leads utilitarianism to be a philosophy which is indifferent to identity and individuality of people. Further, another critical point is the one concerning distributive justice, utilitarianism tries to maximize the social outcome as a whole, what it still fails to take into account is the distribution of that utility.(As explained by the second graph). If we abstract and consider wealth as utility it does not make a difference it one individual has a lot and most others only a little: the general sum of all the utilities is still maximized. Between two actions, one leading to a utility of six for the first individual and an utility of one for the second, and another leading to three for each ,utilitarianism would choose the first because seven is greater than six. This is because all what matters is the sum of utility, although this leads to profound injustice. Finally he claims that each desire is to be calculated and compared to other desires although they might differ in their nature, what is to be understood as a qualitative versus quantitative difference. Conclusion What Rawls criticized in utilitarianism appears to be right for general principles of social welfare. Utilitarianism has to be awarded with the innovation to apply rationality to moral philosophy. Although it forgets the distribution of wealth problem. This latter one appears to be the most effective critique to utilitarianism. It is undeniable that the utilitarian view of each individual maximizing its own utility as he best believes also implies a higher grade of freedom of choice. This choices should thou be made in a way which is not interfering with social purposes. An action should not only be valued from the utility it brings to the single individual but society as a whole. Because in the end even the single individual is staying in society and thou being influenced from the status quo he stays in. Social welfare is not only profiting the ones who directly gain from it but the whole systems stability. Injustices are the seed of contrasts, the French aristocrats living the French Revolution might agree with this view. Not only is the critique effective but also fair on a moral basis. Society should not be led by individualistic principles, such an assumption would mean to put social morality on the same layer as individual one. But societies emerged from collaboration between individuals to achieve something more. This is the reason why the state should try to be better than individuals particularly concerning morality. On the other had it has to be stated that utilitarianism has the great advantage of being practical and effective to apply. The use of calculation implies an incredible advantage in terms of efficiency in decision-making. Further it is not clear why the two principles of justice should necessarily emerge from the original position, this is basically the critique moved to Rawls by many, among them Amartya Sen. The idea is that other principles might emerge from the choice made under the veil of ignorance.

Becoming A Lawyer Essay examples -- Research Lawyer Law Career Essays

Becoming a Lawyer Loving to argue, speak, and to persuade/convince, I have chosen to research the career of a lawyer. I have always been intrigued by the audacity and wit that lawyers have naturally. I will explain the steps in order to be on the right path in order to become a lawyer. While attaining a degree in your undergraduate studies, you must select a major that will be of some assistance and relevance to your particular law career. For example, if you want to be a corporate lawyer, you should major in business or if you want to be a judge, you should major in political science. After attaining your degree in your chosen major, you must attend law school. American Law schools are very expensive, especially if you plan to attend a private law school. That being said, there are excellent law schools in the States (Yale, Harvard, NYU, UT Austin, to name a few), and if you want to practice in the States, this is a good way to go about it. However, the competition to get into the top-rated law schools in the States is ferocious and exceeds by far the competition to get into Canadian law schools. The advice that most people give surrounding applying to US law schools (as there are so many), is to apply to a few "sure-thing" schools, a few schools were you would probably get in, a few where you would probably not get in, and a few "reach" schools, where it seems unlikely that you would be admitted. Keep in mind that even a very high GPA and LSAT score can not guarantee you admission to Harvard, Yale and the other top-rated schools. Because there are so many people in the US, there are more people with excellent grades applying, therefore red ucing your chances, too. After finally finalizing your arrangements and getting into your chosen law school, you must attend school. Law schools differ in their various requirements: many schools have required courses in all years, and some schools only have required courses in their first or second years. As well, many schools will require that you take some breadth courses, which are courses that are intended to round out your education. These courses are ones that are outside the canonical law school curriculum. At some point in the course of law school, you will probably have to do a moot, which is like mock court. In the moot, you are given a fact situation and you have to prepare arguments and deliver ... ... better to college life. It helps me stay focused and keep things organized by wrapping things up and reviewing all things that we learned throughout that particular week. In all, this assignment has helped me a lot by enforcing the need to research before making great decisions. One great decision in my life at this moment is trying to decide on a major and trying to reveal and find out what I really want to be. This assignment has helped me discover what it is like to get into a good law school, what the work load is like, what types of law there is to pursue a career in, and what the salary is. All these components will keep me grounded and stay true to what I originally wanted to pursue which is a career in the legal system of our country. Works Cited: 1)  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Warner, Rose. (1999). 29 Reasons Not to Go to Law School. London: Routeledge. 2)  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Serechal, J.R. (1987). Becoming a Lawyer. New York, New York: HBC Media. 3)  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Gabriel, Peter. (2001, November 4). Law School and its Perks. Retrieved November 7, 2001 from the World Wide Web: http://lawstudents/files.html. 4) Segal, Nancy. (2001, February). So you think you want to be a lawyer. Teen People, p. 45.

Any Animal That Attacks a Human Should be Destroyed at Once :: Animals Violence

An animal that attacks a human being should not be abolished. In any type of case in law, you always have to have justification and be fair, why can’t animals have it? Most animals attack when we attack them, it might have even been an accident. In any law case, no matter high or low, you always have to have reasons for why or at least how it happened. You don’t just say to the lawyer, â€Å"That person harmed me, destroy that person at once.† You wouldn’t, would you? Animals have to be justified to our standards! The animal could have even done it accidentally. Some of the animals might think of us as food. They try biting us, but once they find out we are not food, we don’t just go to them and kill it. It’s an accident. Everyone makes mistakes. Most animals attack when they are attacked or frightened by us. For example, take a look at a snake. Not long ago, I read an information book about snakes and it said, â€Å"We think that snakes deliberately harm us because it is our habit, but think a bit more deeper, we are the ones who harm or frighten them first.† Now take another example and compare it. If someone tried to attack us, what we would do without even thinking is obvious, defend ourselves. Well so do animals. They are only defending and protecting themselves! On the other hand, however, what if it is situation between life and death? If it is a situation between life and death, and you have to kill it, then go ahead. If you are about do die, and a big tiger is going to kill you, you don't just let it eat you, you try to think of the last solution, which is killing it. Therefore, one can conclude, besides the fact that if you are in a situation between "life and death", and have to kill it, it doesn’t give us the right to destroy it other times.

In what ways and to what effect, does Milton use comparison in Paradise Lost Book II? Essay

Paradise Lost is one of the greatest epic poems of the 17th century, written by John Milton. This is a poem of twelve books describing the fall of man in blank verse, in a manner that is at par with Virgil’s Aeneid for the Romans and Homer’s Iliad for ancient Greece. Milton has several ways of using comparison, which he uses profoundly throughout Book II. Allegory, allusions, contrasts, the comparison between heaven, earth and hell, and the different arguments in the book are the most significant and prominent in his poem, and both pertain to his grand style as well as his motifs. Towards the end of book II, Milton presents an allegory of the two figures Sin and Death at the gates of hell who represent their respective abstract ideas and principles, which he develops throughout the entire poem. As they are abstract ideas, they cannot be visualized, thus Milton gives them physical attributes to further allude to the ideas they represent. Sin is described as â€Å"†¦ woman to the waist, and fair, But ended foul in many a scaly fold Voluminous and vast, a serpent armed With mortal sting.† (II.650-53) With this description, it’s clear to see that Sin is an allegory of Eve because Eve is also beautiful and â€Å"fair† on the outside, but deep inside is evil and tempted by a â€Å"serpent†, even if she is not composed of one. Also, Sin explains how she was seduced by Satan, and as a result of their fornication, conceive Death. She then explains how Death raped her â€Å"†¦in embraces forcible and foul† (II.793) and created monsters that are â€Å"hourly conceived And hourly born, with sorrow infinite To me;† (II.797-99) Both Eve and Sin are seduced by Satan, have excruciatingly painful labor, and bring about the beginning of mortality for all of mankind as a result of sin. Milton has created Sin as an allegory of the whole concept of sin, and furthermore, suggested that women accomplish their sin by being seductive and beautiful, yet evil and serpent-like. Death on the other hand, is a shadow-like creature, described as having a â€Å"†¦head The likeness of a kingly crown had on.† (II.672-73) He is allegorically the consequence of both Sin and Satan’s sin. Interestingly enough, Death is in control of his condition, and instead of enduring suffering himself, he enjoys inflicting human pain. This can clearly be seen as a symbolic, comparative representation of death on earth and how it often inflicts human pain, as well as the way in which us humans are not in control of it. The effect of this comparative literary technique enables the reader to stretch the imagination in order to effectively draw symbolic conclusions and make logical deductions. Another effect of this technique is that it introduces multiple interpretations. For example, another interpretation of Sin and Death is that they could be the pathway for humans to enter Hell through Death, and Sin could simply be one who has paved that way by giving birth to eternal mortality, or alternatively they could be an allegory of The Holy Trinity. These different interpretations lead to a deeper understanding of t he poem, and make it all the more intriguing. As well as making allegorical allusions, Milton also makes allusions to other literary works. The first allusion he makes is in the first two lines of Book two; â€Å"High on a throne of royal state, which far Outshone the wealth of Ormus and of Ind,†¦Ã¢â‚¬ (II.1-2) are an allusion to Ormus and Ind. Ormus is an island in the Persian Gulf, and Ind is an abbreviation for India. He makes reference to these places because they’re highly celebrated for their pearls and jewels. â€Å"Sage he stood, With Atlantean shoulders fit to bear The weight of the mightiest monarchies;†(II.305-7) is another allusion to the Greek mythological figure Atlas, who was able to carry the world. Milton uses references to specific people and places in order to emphasize and reinforce the grand stature of the character(s) he Is referring to, which in the above examples, would be Satan and Beelzebub respectively. Another purpose of his allusions is to further extend the reader’s imagination and understanding, whilst creating vivid imagery in the reader’s mind, through comparisons. Lastly, these allusions are important in his work because they not only make his writing exotic, but they also add a lot of weight and grandeur to his style. Another comparative literary feature that is quite prominent in Milton’s works is the use of contrasts, such as antitheses and oxymoron’s. These figures of speech are important in Paradise Lost because they are used to convey and accentuate vivid, yet unorthodox imagery. â€Å"To that bad eminence† (II.6) and â€Å"†¦this darkness light†(II.220) are among his many uses of oxymoron’s. This poetic device not only extends the imagery of the poem, but it also heightens the message or emotion behind it in a non-literal sense. A powerful example of antithesis which is not in Book II, but was still discussed in class is, â€Å"Hee for God only, Shee for God in him†. This is a powerful example because Milton has conveyed sharply contrasting ideas in an emphatic, yet adorning way. Accompanying this feature are the contrasts between light and dark to convey good or bad. With this, his contrasts also include high and low (in terms of altitude or status), and God and Satan. Milton’s strong imagery of light and darkness to convey these contrary ideas could be attributed to his blindness. Although he describes Satan as a powerful being, he generally describes hell as dark, fiery and very low, as opposed to heaven which is described as light and highly exalted. This can be noted in â€Å"What can be worse Than to dwell here, driven out from bliss, condemned In this abhorred deep to utter woe; Where pain of unextinguishable fire†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (II.85) and a few lines later he states â€Å"He from Heaven’s higth†(II.190) Contrasts like these are important because they help us to further extend our understanding of Milton’s paradigms of food and bad, and from this, we can deduce that the absence of light in Hell and in Satan symbolize the absence of God in all his glory. Milton’s contrasts of light and dark, and high and low to convey good and bad are also used to contrast Heaven, Hell and Earth. Milton presents a hierarchy based on the proximity to God. Heaven is at the top of the hierarchy where â€Å"Heaven’s high Arbitrator† (II.359) sits, and the primary quality is light. Hell is at the very bottom of the hierarchy and is portrayed as the antithesis of heaven, which is primarily dark. â€Å"As he our darkness, cannot we his light†(II.269) Is a phrase which best portrays the strong contrasts between the two places. Earth is depicted as the young, vulnerable middle-ground connected to both Heaven and Earth. It is also the battlefield that Beelzebub suggests they try to corrupt because he knows that although there is goodness on earth, it is not at par with that of Heaven’s, and is thus able to be defeated. It is portrayed as the neutral middle-ground by Beelzebub who states that the new race of man is â€Å"To be created like to us, though less In power an excellence, but favoured more Of him who rules above;† (II.349-351) Also, Milton’s geographical description of hell has similar physical features as earth (Mountains, rivers, valleys), however, the only difference is that hell has the worst in nature. Milton describes hell as â€Å"†¦dark and wild, beat with perpetual storms Of whirlwind and dire hail, which on firm land Thaws not,† (II.588-90) with streams â€Å"Whose waves of torrent fire inflame with rage.† (II.581) By knowing that Hell is the degenerated form of nature, and that Earth is the middle-ground, we can deduce that Heaven is the more natural and aesthetically pleasing form of nature. This further highlights the hierarchical contrast between the three places. An interesting observation I made was that Earth is connected to heaven with a gold chain and connected to hell through a dark gulf (Chaos and Night). This shows the contrast between the journey to Heaven and Hell. Milton is implying that throughout life, Man must choose to make the difficult, strenuous journey up the gold chain into Heaven, or take the easy way and perambulate down to Heaven through the wide gulf. These hierarchical contrasts and comparisons not only give clarity to the settings in the poem, but also give us a deeper understanding of the nature of the characters in the story. Most importantly, it provides a philosophical and theological context for the poem and it gives us deeper insight into the beliefs and prin ciples that Milton adheres to, without being persuasive. The hierarchy and balance of good and evil are also portrayed and compared through the different speeches given by arch devils Moloch, Belial, Mammon and Beelzebub. Milton seems to depict a certain balance between good and evil or Heaven and Hell, and from that, it is clear that he believes that good will always reign over evil. The first arch devil to speak is Moloch. He proposes open warfare on a battlefield. He believes they have nothing to lose because â€Å"What can be worse Than to swell here, driven out from bliss, condemned In this abhorred deep to utter woe;† (II.85-87) So he clearly believes that nothing can be worse than living in hell anyway. Lastly, he says even if they are defeated in the battle â€Å"†¦if not victory, is yet revenge†(II.1.5). The second speaker is Belial who disagrees and suggests that they stay in hell in the hope that God will forgives them, or over time, they will grow used to the eternal pain and suffering. He has based his reasoning on the belief that even if God could kill them, he never would, and because he is almighty, he can see everything they are doing, and thus, they might be subjected to an even worse hell. The third speaker, Mammon, disagrees to both proposals and suggests that they build a kingdom in hell that will someday be equal to Heaven, because open warfare would be unavailing, and they would not want to go back to living in heaven eternally anyway. Finally, Beelzebub proposes that they do neither. He states that war will be futile because there is no place where God does not reign, so instead, Beelzebub tells them of a new race that God created called â€Å"Man†, and suggests that they seek revenge against him by seducing Man to their side. This is the decision that is unanimously agreed upon. All these proposal’s present Milton’s views about the balance of good and evil, as well as his theological beliefs. The first proposal is rejected because open warfare between Heaven and Hell would be ineffective as Heaven and righteousness will always conquer evil. Belial’s proposal is dismissed because the fallen angels would never be forgiven by God because evil will never go away, thus, the fallen angels will always exist. Finally, as Mammon suggests, there will never be peace between Heaven and Hell because Hell will never match up to Heaven’s greatness, and although Hell will always exist, it will always be under God’s control. The reason Beelzebub’s proposal is agreed upon is because Milton believes that Earth, and therefore Mankind, is the neutral, middle-ground between Heaven and Hell, Angels and Devils, as well as good and evil. It therefore serves as an effective battleground for good and evil forces on earth, as well as in the souls and consciences of mankind. The effect of these comparisons gives us further insight into the beliefs of the philosophical and theological elements in Milton’s time period, as well as the relative forces of good and evil, and how they effect the lives of mankind. In conclusion, there are various ways that Milton uses comparison in Paradise Lost, which each have different effects that range from the introduction of multiple interpretations, to simply extending our understanding of the story through vivid imagery. The comparisons that Milton uses are so complex that they are all connected in some way or other, and this alone gives us an even deeper understanding of the theological and philosophical messages conveyed in the poem. Ultimately, Milton’s intension was to tell the story of Man’s fall, and with his comparisons, he has managed to do much more than just that.

Rfid Monitoring System With SMS Essay

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Technology refers to the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes. Over the years, technology brought forth different products that would make man’s life more convenient and enjoyable. The products include, but are not limited to computers, televisions, radio, satellites, light bulb, automobiles, robots, and mobile phones. Others include virtual simulations of real life phenomena like life simulation games, virtual assistants and artificial intelligence. Technology greatly affected mankind as it helped them achieve things which may seem impossible to attain and gain truth and knowledge from things which may seem complicated to decode or understand. Through the years to come, technology will continue to lead man to the path of scientific advancement. A virtual pet is a type of an artificial human companion. Virtual pets differ from real pets as they have no concrete physical form other than the hardware they run on. On the other hand, like a real animal, if a virtual pet is neglected, it can get sick and die. Interaction with virtual pets may or may not be goal oriented, depending on the player. If the interaction is goal oriented, then the player must keep it alive as long as possible and often help it to grow into higher forms. In order to keep the pet alive a player often has to ‘feed’, ‘groom’, and ’play’ with his or her virtual pet. If it is not goal oriented, then the player may experiment with the game by trying out different pets to know which one he or she likes to take care of. A virtual pet can be a simulation of real or imaginary animals in computers, tablets, smartphones, or sometimes, in electronic toys. Virtual pet games are a subclass of life simulation games. Life simulation games are about â€Å"maintaining and growing a manageable population of organisms†, where players are given the power to control the lives of autonomous creatures or people. One thing that distinguishes virtual pets from other simulation games is, it is designed to be ‘cute’ and it has the ability to act out on a range of emotions based on a player’s interaction. Aside from providing entertainment to players, the main purpose of virtual pet games is to teach players the responsibilities of taking care of a pet. A virtual pet game could be used as a training for a person who wants to adopt an animal as a pet. It can help people determine if they are committed to taking care of a real animal. Plus, virtual pet games can be used in lieu of taking care of a real live pet for people who have allergic reactions to certain animals. The Virtual Pet Caretaking Game proposed by the researchers would be a big help for those people who think of having real pets. It will be developed in the android platform which can only be accessible to android phone users. With this game, they can be taught of the responsibilities of having to take care of a pet. Players will often get to enjoy various interactions with their pets such as feeding them, grooming them, playing with them, and giving them gifts such as accessories. The virtual pets, although ‘cartoony’ in design, will often simulate various reactions from real pets such as barking, yapping, purring, enjoying a good old ‘belly rub’, scratching, etc. It will also include a state indicator to determine if a pet is hungry, upset, bored, sick, lonely, and having the urge to defecate or urinate. This game also exhibits realistic tendencies that could happen if a player forgets to feed, groom, or give medicine to his or her pet. These tendencies inc lude death, sickness, and bad odor caused by unsanitary hygiene. Project Context One of the problems encountered in the Philippines can be seen in its streets. There are various stray dogs, cats and other animals that were once part of a ‘family’ (considering some people often think of pets as part of a family) which are now neglected and are roaming the city in search for food and shelter. These pets, due to hunger, unsanitary hygiene, and being exposed to harsh environmental conditions without shelter, often get sick. They could carry diseases that could harm not only them, but also the human beings. Neglected pets such as these are often pitiful to see. If only the people who were once the owners of these animals knew how to take care of a pet, then problems like these wouldn’t arise. Some people often think that having a pet is an easy job. They think that they can manage to take care of their pets even if they have work or classes to attend to. They might tell themselves that they are responsible enough to raise pets and would sometimes rush into adopting one without having enough knowledge on how to take care of it. In most cases, people are not prepared to have pets. There will come a time when they will pay little attention to the pets they once adored and showered affections with. This could lead to the detrimental of their pets’ health or sometimes, even death. Thus, the proponents have decided to develop the Virtual Pet Caretaking Game to train the people before having a real pet. This game will help them know the pet’s needs and wants. Players will learn to be patient and loving with their pets or else the pets get sick or die. This game could also aid the players in choosing the right animal for them to adopt as a pet, in the future. In addition, this game could also be used to determine a player’s commitment to taking care of a real pet. If the pet lived a happy and fruitful life during its virtual lifetime, then this is a good indication that the player or owner of the virtual pet is ready to have a real live pet. Purpose and Description This project is addressed to all people who want to raise a pet for the first time, but do not have any idea of what problems they will face if they do. Many people suffer in the process of raising a pet, because they cannot adjust or even simply understand the behavior of their pets. Health of their pet is not properly balanced and proper hygiene is not consistent due to a busy schedule. But the worse scenario is taken and carried by their beloved pets. Because of health problems, these pets are prone to different kinds of viruses and sickness, less exercise will add up and less attention will boost stress that will affect their behavior, action and interaction to people, and other animals. Virtual Pet Caretaking Game is an application that will let users or players see a forecast of what to do to raise a pet. The player’s main goal in this game is to maintain his or her virtual pet’s health, hygiene, and happiness  bars as great as possible. Through this, players will get to train themselves to become good pet caretakers someday. The game possesses a great Graphical User Interface that will suit to all ages. This means that parents won’t have to worry about guiding their children in playing this game. This game is not only for children, because its goal will suit to all pet lovers out there, and because of its easy to use navigation and controls, the proponents are pretty sure that everybody won’t have a hard time in navigating this game. Mistakes are acceptable if the pet owners learned from it, but if their pets continue to suffer from the same mistakes, it is a different story. The choice is in the players’ hands. Through a virtual pet game, players will get to learn many things about taking care of a pet. General Objective The primary objective of this project is to develop an application that will temporarily replace the role of real pets in people’s lives. The purpose of replacing a real pet is to expose the people who want to have pets, to all situations that they may face if they raise their own pets. Situations like; how to feed, when to feed or what to feed; is very important and would be very crucial in raising real pets. This will teach people the responsibilities one has to do in order for the pet to survive. Watching and understanding their different emotions are important too and letting them grow healthy in the players’ hands is a must! This game is designed for children and adults who want to know their responsibilities in raising a pet. This is also for the pet’s safety; because ignorance of pet lovers can harm them and can boost stress that will greatly affect their emotion, action, and interaction with people. This game will simulate behaviors and characteristics of a real pet, to let a user or a player feel that he or she is raising a real pet. If the user is doing something wrong, the virtual pet will react accordingly. Specific Objectives Below are the specific objectives of the study 1. To develop a game which simulates virtual pets to temporarily replace real animals as pets. 2. To develop virtual pets which can simulate the behaviors of real animals. 3. To teach people the proper ways of taking care of a pet. 4. To assess if a person is suitable in raising or adopting a real animal as a pet. 5. To provide a user friendly interface that suits for all ages. 6. To provide user convenience by implementing simple navigation or controls. Scope and Limitation of the Study The study of Virtual Pet Caretaking Game covers the processes of simulating virtual pets to mimic real life pets to let the user or player feel that he or she is taking care of a real pet. It will include various things that the user can do to interact with his or her virtual pet such as feeding it, grooming it, playing with it, giving it accessories, and giving it medicine if the pet is sick. The game also covers tendencies that could happen if a virtual pet is not treated right, such as sickness or death. If the pet is raised with affections, then the pet will grow bigger and healthier, up to the last days of its virtual life. Like a real pet, a virtual pet will not live forever, so taking good care of a virtual pet is a must, if the player wants his or her virtual pet to live a happy virtual life. However, there are features which the proponents would limit for the game, such as, the game will only be developed in a two-dimensional graphic display and the game will not include social interactions with other players over the internet. Furthermore, by the end of the virtual pet’s lifetime, players can get to assess themselves if they are ready to adopt or raise a real animal as a pet. If the virtual pet lived a happy virtual life, then the player may now adopt or raise a real pet. Otherwise, it can be an indicator that the player needs to have more training in taking care of a virtual pet so that in the future, the player will be ready to adopt or raise real pets.