The Potential Effects of a Large Earthquake Essay

The Potential Effects of a Large Earthquake - Essay Example The essay "The potential effects of a large earthquake" discusses the possible areas to move in, their main good and disruptive factors. Earthquake hazard mapping is mainly used in California in efforts to ensure that there is effective land use. There has been an awareness on seismic safety to both public and private investors to prevent building or occupying areas with active faults. The first location we are discussing is 3700 Perie lane, San Jose which is near San Andrea’s faults. The information which is going to guide us in understanding better the area and its activities based on maps and geotechnical data from geological investigations, technical reports and reports from the geological survey regarding earthquakes and liquefaction potential brought about by landslide zones. The stability of the 3700 Perie lane, San Jose is mainly affected by the material type, vegetation cover, inclination and moisture content. There are numerous types of landslides in the area of San Jose and the major one in this area is the rock slide, translational and rotational, earth slide, complex slides, earth slides, debris slides and rock fall. Different Zones along Perie |lane, San Jose are high influenced by either geological or soil conditions which have a great impact on the development of the area. This city is well known as the most active in earthquakes and tsunamis by seismologist and geologist. A regular occurrence of Tsunamis along San Andrea Faults is associated with the crustal movement along the active fault zones.

Latin America Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Latin America - Essay Example Monroe Doctrine was a proof of new American imperialism, which attempted to secure American interests in the Western Hemisphere, as is evident from the speech of President James Monroe, delivered on the occasion of seventh annual meet of the Congress on December 2, 1823. It was made clear to the Western nations that America wanted no outside interference in the political matters of the countries of Western Hemisphere. Actually, the Monroe Doctrine was an indication of American desire to increase its political hold on the Latin countries, being ruled by proxy of the European powers. The purpose of the Doctrine was initially concurrent; it aimed to thwart away the European powers from the region, which later became part of its policy to bring the Latin countries under American impression, irrespective of the feelings of the people of Latin American countries. Things turned for the worse for American interests when the Monroe Doctrine was invoked in 1865 because of military support prov ided by America to the Mexican President Benito Juarez for organizing a successful revolt against the Emperor Maximilian (The Monroe Doctrine 1-2). US Policy Failure It is also contended that the Pan-American movement of the US in the 1880s and 1890s was initiated to secure the commercial stakes of the US. The leader of the movement, James G Blaine, thought that such a movement could help in reducing the European social and political impact and promote undisputed resolution of inter-linked issues of the US with Latin countries. The American attempt to enter into a treaty with eleven Latin countries for the resolution of issues could not succeed as no Latin country ratified the agreement later. Argentina was giving competition to the US to lead the region in the matter of creating economic and political impressions in South America; it boycotted the opening session of the Pan American conference (Hall and Coerver 21). The US wars in the Caribbean region were fought with the aim of ex panding the US impression strategically against Cuba and Puerto Rico. The two ocean issues focused on the significance of an Isthimian canal, increasing US stakes in Central America. The US came to recognize the critical role of the navy, an issue of top concern for the upcoming President Theodore Roosevelt. The expansionary intentions of the US in the Caribbean region created worries even in far-flung countries, as Chile and Argentina, over the US war initiative to get political and economic leverage in the hemisphere. There can be no doubt that the US took only first step in the right direction of freeing a colony, but only to become an expansionary power later. Monroe Doctrine is a proof of American defensive policy turning offensive. The American war paved the path for its becoming a global power, which was incidentally its first phase of aggressiveness through interventionist policy in the aligned area of its stakes (Hall and Coerver 21). Latin American revolutionaries were und er the wrong impression that the US would help their freedom movement but to their dismay, the US approach was cautionary. The government preferred to remain neutral. The US had doubts that any ousting of the European powers from the Hemisphere would lead to democratization of institutions. A policy shift in the US approach was seen only when Monroe became its president, but the US waging a war on Mexico was a planned attack of a powerful nation on

Utilitarianism and Happiness Essay Example for Free

Utilitarianism and Happiness Essay Classical Utilitarianism is a moral philosophy, which was developed in 19th century England by Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill and Henry Sidgwick. The essential feature a utilitarian reside in, is the notion that an action is right if it produces the most amount of happiness well limiting suffering. Utilitarianism focuses solely on the consequences of the action, in an attempt to bring about the most happiness from each situation, well ensuring everybody’s happiness is equally considered. A utilitarian decides each action, by calculating the overall utility (good) that will results against the overall disutility (bad) that will result from a particular action. The action with the highest total net utility will be chosen. Within Utilitarianism there is a division between the conceptions of what is perceived as good; Hedonist Utilitarianism and Preference Utilitarianism. Classical utilitarians believe in Hedonist, were pleasure or happiness is perceives as the only intrinsic good. In modern society most utilitarians believe that the concept of good refers to preferences, and that individual preference satisfaction should be maximized for example artistic creation. There is a further division between utilitarians; Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism. Rule Utilitarianism, holds that one should always follow rules that tend to promote the general welfare of humans for example a rule might be not to killing people. Act Utilitarianism holds that one should always act to promote the general welfare. Utilitarianism is plausible firstly because general overall happiness is achieved for the greatest amount of people. Second, because of it simplicity it is easy to determine whether an action is moral or immoral. You simply have to calculate the total utility against the total disutility for each action, and chose the action that will result in the most happiness. Third, the majority of society uses Utilitarianism when they are confronted with daily decisions. For example in peak hour traffic the majority of drivers would let another driver change into their lane, because the other driver obviously needs to change lanes. The other driver is likely to gain more happiness from being let in than the potential unhappiness it will cause you by waiting a few extra second in traffic. Fourth, it is a simply way off living a moral life, were you do not necessary have to be religious to be moral in your decision-making. The strongest objection against Utilitarianism is that it cannot accommodate for moral considerations such as individuals rights and justice. This is because Utilitarianism only considers the consequence of an action. This objection is highlighted in a case concerning an innocent man whose was wrongfully convicted of a crime. In 1974, England, Gerry Conlon was falsely imprisoned, for the bombing of a pub in the town of Guilford, which killed five people. This case raises the issue that the consequences of an action should not be the only things considered when deciding which action to take. If a utilitarian was to view this case critics would argue that a utilitarian would have to conclude that even with, bad consequences resulting from convicting an innocent man, their would overall be more good consequences derived from the peace of mind gained from the loved one of the deceased, as well as the community of Guilford. Critics of Utilitarianism would argue that greater consequences would result in convicting the innocent man, therefore Utilitarianism is unable to regard the importance of justice, this philosophy must therefore be wrong. With the objection that Utilitarianism cannot accommodate for the importance of justice, a utilitarian would address this concern with the response that by choosing the action that results in the best consequences, justice will ultimately be protected. Justice will always be protected even if it is not a utilitarian ultimate purpose. In regards to Gerry Conlon case, a utilitarian would never choose to convict an innocent man of a crime he didn’t commit because, even if more happiness was achieved in the short run through this false conviction, in the long run more unhappiness is likely to result. In the long run the guilty man would be likely to bomb again or commit another crime, also if the liar was discovered then the situation would cause greater disutility than utility, and may result in the dispatch of the justice system, as-well as great upset for the deceased family members who thought the bomber had already been punished. Therefore even though Utilitarianism doesn’t accommodate the moral consideration of justice directly, greater utility will always be created from upholding the justice system. The other aspect of the objection address criticism that Utilitarianism doesn’t accommodating individuals rights, therefore critics believe Utilitarianism must be wrong. A utilitarian would argue that just because rights are not directly considered in relation to the consequences of an action, they do in-fact have some impact on the chosen action. With majority of the population getting happiness out of doing the right thing, rights are often protected through Utilitarianism. For the small minority of people that don’t experience unhappiness from disregarding human rights, the existence of the police force ensures human right are protected from these members of society. With human rights being protected under law, people rights will be upheld under Utilitarianism because there will always be a larger amount of disutility from violating the law than from the personal gains of a human right offender. For example the CEO and CFO of Tyco a New Jersey-based company stole $150 million and inflated Tyco incomes by $500 million, in doing so they violated the rights of investors. After the police discovered this fraud, the justice system penalized both, with a sentence of 8-25 years in prison with the addition of $2. 92 billion paid to Tyco Investors. Under Utilitarianism this case wouldn’t occur because the benefits of stealing this money would never outweigh the consequences that result from being caught for defrauding investors. Therefore even though rights are not considered in the consequence of an action, they have a strong connection with the chosen action. Word- 992Ã'Ž

Animal Testing Should be Reduced :: Animal Testing

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The common belief is that animal testing has accelerated science and medicine a great deal, but the truth is simple: animal experimentation has not cured a single disease. People have been misled into believing that animal experimentation is responsible for many â€Å"miracle cures† and â€Å"medical breakthroughs† for decades. The reason is very straightforward: animals differ from humans greatly—too much to be able to have accurate results from experiments. The only progress with infectious disease made in the 20th century was made through improved nutrition, hygiene, and public sanitation. This is not a result of animal research. In response, many ask this question: what about the polio vaccine? Was it not developed through animal testing? This is one of the biggest lies ever spread throughout the public. The polio vaccine had many problems and did nothing to stop the disease. It was released in the 50’s, a time when polio was alrea dy declining because natural infectious microorganisms have a specific life cycle; they grow and reach a peak—at that point, they start to die off. What proves this is the fact that in areas in the U.S. and in other countries where neither the vaccine nor any other medical help was given, polio died off at the same rate as the places without medical help.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Here is my question to all those pro animal testers out there: if animal testing is so safe, why is it that the FDA is forced to take thousands of pharmaceutical drugs off the shelves after they have been proven â€Å"safe† after animal experimentation? In response, someone may say something such as this: animal testing is better than nothing; besides, they are just beings that do not think or reason. It is true that the main difference between humans and other animals is our ability to think and reason. However, what about those who are mentally challenged? Surely, some animals are smarter than some humans are. Surely there are some humans who cannot think or reason; yet, these people are treated in a special way.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Animals are constantly being tortured while scientists and test conductors claim that the animals are not in pain and given painkillers. However, this is not true. Most tests do cause pain. If you think about it, how can tests trying to see if make-up irritates the eye, not be painful? In addition, these animals are not given anesthetics prior to tests nor any painkillers administered to ease the pain afterward in fear that these drugs may cause inaccurate results in tests.

Islam and Christianity Essay

Prompt: Using the documents, compare and contrast the attitudes of Christianity and Islam toward merchants and trade from the religions origins’ origins until about 1500. Are there indications of change over time in either case, or both? What kinds of additional documents would you need to assess the consequences of these attitudes on merchant activities? During the Post-Classical Era merchants played an incredible role in shaping the course of different societies. Christianity in its origins had a negative view of merchants while Islam was more positive as seen in their religious documents; however by 1500 the two religions had switched their views, Christianity more positive and Islam negative as displayed in the opinions of authorities and the action of merchants. Views on wealth can be seen in the religious documents of each religion. Christianity had its genesis in the first century C.E. and had a negative view of merchants and wealth as stated by Jesus (doc 1) However, this source is just one statement from the Christian scriptures and additional religious documents would be necessary to make a complete thorough argument on Christianity’s views on wealth and merchants. On the other hand Islam which was born in the 7th century C.E. and was more positive in its treatment of wealth if the merchant was honorable (doc 2). As in the case of Christianity it would be necessary to have further passages from the Koran on the issue of wealth and merchants to give a complete picture of Islam’s origins view. However with the sources provided it is clear that Christianity has a more negative view on wealth than Islam at their origins. As time progressed in the Post-Classical Era there were major changes in Islam and Christianity as seen in the discussions of Authorities. Islam had expanded across Afro-Asia and had become very wealthy because of trade in Dhar Al-Islam. On the other hand Christian Europe had entered a Dark-Ages of little trade with the fall of the Roman Empire in the West. However, by 1200 C.E. Europe had come out of the Dark-Ages on its way to the Renaissance. Europe was very interested in wealth and trade. An additional source of trade maps displaying trade wealth in 800 C.E. and 1500 C.E. of Islam and Christianity would help to explain why the views of the religions were changing. This change can be seen in Reginald’s writing about St. Godric in the 12th century C.E. Godric is a saint recognized by the church because he helped with his wealth  acquired by being a merchant. Godric used his wealth for good as a result one could argue that wealth acquired is not evil as long as it used well. It is important to note that Reginald is a colleague of St. Godric and he could be biased causing Godric to look better than he really was. This could change the use of this document because the information may not be completely valid (doc 3). Showing the change in Christianity is Aquinas’ argument in the 13th century C.E. He argues against being dishonest in trade and wealth. He does not condemn wealth and trade just negative ways to conduct trade (doc 4). This brings Christianity very close to Muhammad’s statements in the Koran. Islam on the hand was more negative in its view of merchants. Ibn Khaldun argues that no merchant can be a true honest man. Yet he still has to concede that trade is necessary (doc 5). This source could be biased because it occurred after the fall of the Abassid Empire and the problems with wealth and opulence that had plagued the Islamic world; moreover he could be an Ulama and had a strict view of Islam. As a result it could not portray what other scholars believed a t the time. This negative Islamic view can also be seen in the court decision of the 17th century C.E. in the verdict is against a merchant (doc 7). It is clear that Islam is closer to Christianities original views on Merchants and Christianity is becoming more positive. The views of Merchants provides a clear change. In the 13th century C.E. Christian merchants are engaged in using religious terms promoting trade. Even a mother of a rich merchant advises him to be thankful but not too greedy. Again this is very close to Islam’s original position on the issue. This document could be biased because it is merchants writing and the words of a mother. Neither of these people would be negative on themselves or loved ones. As a result this could exaggerate the practice of Christian in merchants and trade (doc 6). An additional source of different merchants writings would be good to see if all merchants used Christianity to sanction their actions. Moreover it would be good to have other Islamic merchants in writings than just document 7. This would give a better view of Islamic merchant actions around 1500 C.E. By 1500 C.E. it is clear that Christianity had become more in-line to Islam’s original views on merchants and Islam was more in-line to Christianity’s origins.

Drama Monologue – Blame It on the Dreams

Ever wish you could control your dreams? You know, you go to sleep and dream about whatever you want? Sometimes I think I could really FIX things if I could just dream them right. I guess that sounds pretty stupid. Like last week I had this huge test in English. I really like English, but there's so much to remember. I failed. And I know that stuff. That’s what makes me so mad. Who cares, right? It’s just a stupid test. But, here’s the thing. The night before, I dreamt I passed the test. I got an A. I remember sitting at the table, and I knew everything!Every vowel, every sentence, every character. They were all there. Floating around me like birds, or something. I didn’t end up seeing the answers, but I remember getting an A. Okay. Granted, there was a lobster sitting in the seat next to me, but it was a dream, remember. I heard about this thing called lucid dreaming. You’re meant to lie really still for as long as you can until you fall asleep, or something. Well, that sounds way too hard. I mean, I can’t sit still for five minutes, let alone lie still until I fall asleep. Sleep doesn’t just happen.You get into your PJ’s, get into bed, get all snuggly and warm, and then your brain decides to turn itself on and shout, â€Å"WOULDN’T THIS BE COOL IF THIS HAPPENED. I WONDER WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THIS HAPPENED, OR EVEN THI–oh, you didn’t want to sleep, did you? † Yes, brain. Yes, I do. But, seriously, wouldn’t it be cool to control your dreams? You could dream about, oh I don’t know†¦ Marrying the richest person in the world and buying an island? That’d be nice. Unrealistic. But, nice. You could lay there for hours and hours just thinking about what you want to dream about?I could try that? Pony, pony, pony, pony, pony, pony, pony, pony, pony, po – oh, bother this. This won’t work. What was I thinking? This is all because of that stupid test. I hate failure. I hate it. If only there was a way to guarantee that you’d know the answers to every test you had to take in your life. I could cheat? No! Gosh, what was I thinking? I can’t cheat. I haven’t got a marker to write the answers on my stomach. *sigh* Stupid idea. I could get a marker? Argh! Wrong again. Where on earth would I get a marker that only I could see?That’s a cool idea. I wish I could dream about that. I just wish I knew how to pass every single test ever. *sigh* Hang on†¦ What if I study? I could study for a few hours every night, the week before the test? Ha! It’s brilliant. I can’t believe I never listened to my parents! They were right! I can’t wait to get started. I’ll start first thing tomorrow. I guess I’ll never be able to control my dreams. Oh well. *turns around and looks at ‘bed’* Is that me? But†¦ I’m me? How can I be laying there? I’m so confused, w hat’s going on? Wait†¦ Am I dreaming?

Molières Death and the Color Green

Molià ¨re's Death and the Color Green Whether or not you are an actor, you probably know that it is considered bad luck to say Good luck to a performer. Instead, you should say, Break a leg! And if you have brushed up on your Shakespeare, then you already know that it could be disastrous to say Macbeth out loud while in a theater. To avoid being cursed, you should instead refer to it as the Scottish play. Unlucky to Wear the Color Green? However, many do not realize that it is unlucky for actors to wear the color green. Why? It is all because of the life and death of Frances greatest playwright, Molià ¨re. Molià ¨re His real name was Jean-Baptiste Poquelin, but he was most famous for his stage name, Molià ¨re. He attained success as an actor in his early twenties and soon found that he had a talent for writing stage plays. Although he preferred tragedies, he became renowned for his hilarious satires. Tartuffe was one of his more scandalous plays. This vicious farce mocked the church and caused an uproar among Frances religious community. Controversial Plays   Another controversial play, Don Juan or The Feast with a Statue, mocked society and religion so severely that it was not performed uncensored until 1884, over two hundred years after its creation. But in some ways, Molià ¨res demise is even more intense than his plays. He had been suffering from tuberculosis for several years. However, he did not want the illness to prevent his artistic pursuits. His final play was The Imaginary Invalid. Ironically, Molià ¨re played the central character - the hypochondriac. Royal Performance   During a royal performance before King Louis the 14th, Molià ¨re began to cough and gasp. The performance was stalled momentarily, but Molià ¨re insisted that he continue. He bravely made it through the rest of the play, despite collapsing once more and suffering a hemorrhage. Hours later, after returning home, Molià ¨res life slipped away. Perhaps due to his reputation, two clergymen refused to administer his last rites. So, when he died, a rumor spread that Molià ¨res soul did not make it into the Pearly Gates. Molià ¨res costume - the clothing that he died in - was green. And since that time, actors have maintained the superstition that it is highly unlucky to wear green while on-stage.