A Systems Approach to the Exploration of Challenges of Online Distance Literature review - 2

A Systems Approach to the Exploration of Challenges of Online Distance Education in the context of Saudi Arabia - Literature review Example Reinforcing is the process by which the different components of a system are put into action. Balancing process makes sure that every component of a system is in equilibrium with each other. Feedback forms an integral part of the sytems thinking approach. For instance while analyzing a project on human resource; the management is considering increasing the number of employees in the organization, however past results show that increasing the number of workers has proven to be counterproductive. Therefore in such a scenario the firm must take into consideration feedbacks generated from past actions to analyse the current system (Checkland and Poulter, 2010). Sytems thinking was founded in the year 1956 by the MIT professor Jay Forrestor. Forrestor had recognized that there was a need of a better way of testing new ideas and aspects of the social system like in the manner how ideas are tested in engineering. In traditional forms of analysis, a system in broken up into different parts and then studied. In case of sytems thinking, a system’s parts are analysed on the basis of how they interact with each other in order to produce behaviour (Checkland and Winter, 2006). System thinking emphasizes upon the proper usage of input so that the desired results can be obtained. In case of analyzing a project as a system, the inputs are capital, labour, machines materials and time. The desired output can be in the form of services and products. The systems thinking approach induces the detailed analysis of each aspect of the action plan that is formulated to achieve the desired results. Therefore the management needs to consider the critical success factors and the impact of the external environment upon the operations. The systems theory brings stability in the operations of an organization which otherwise can be chaotic as the business environment, both internal and external are constantly changing. The systems approach also

Nukes; Who Has the Power Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Nukes; Who Has the Power - Essay Example State Department 1). In addition, the agency also ensures that there is peaceful exchange of equipment and use of nuclear energy (U.S. State Department 1). The Nuclear Weapons Council (NWC) plays a major role in maintaining the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile. The department ensures that U.S. nuclear weapons are safe, secure, reliable, and effective. The NWC department facilitates cooperation and establishes priorities that govern the management of U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile through the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy (Natural Resources Defense Council 1). Indeed, the Department of Defense (DOD) administers the countrys military units prepared to work nuclear weapons and their delivery vehicles (Natural Resources Defense Council 1). The department oversees the uniformed military and agencies handling nuclear weapons issues. It also drafts arrangements for utilizing nuclear weapons and oversees the transaction of nuclear arms control understandings. On the other hand, the Department of Energy researches, produces, and dismantles nuclear warheads and materials (Natural Resources Defense Council 1). The National Nuclear Security Administration oversees the nation’s nuclear weapons design facilities and safeguards the safety, reliability, durability, and security of U.S nuclear weapons and naval nuclear reactors (U.S Department of Energy 1). The National Nuclear Security Administration responds to nuclear emergency in America and addresses global nuclear nonproliferation issues. The agency seeks to reduce global danger from weapons of mass destruction and offers safe and effective nuclear propulsion to the American Navy (U.S Department of Energy 1). The National Security Council is an executive branch in the Office of the President that coordinates efforts among government offices trying to control the spread of nuclear weapons and to address nuclear deterrence and security

The Perspective of Philosophy of Mind and Psychology Essay

The Perspective of Philosophy of Mind and Psychology - Essay Example The external explanations are odd with the empirical science we know psychology to be. Descartes eliminated the psychological characteristics in trying to explain the view that a soul is always conscious or thinking. To this perspective, an entity seems to have unactualized mental dispositions and capacities. It is doubtful that the argument by Descartes is not speaking of the physical organism that may be temporary without certain conscious states while remaining alive and physically capable of the state. Therefore, the argument of an entity imagined having neither the physical properties nor current conscious states for a period, which is against the laws of physical science. Therefore, with respect to science, it would not be clear to what it would mean to speak of it (Flanagan, 2007). The first law of the thermodynamics that relates a cause to be at least stronger as its effect does not go in line with Descartes views. The reason being that if otherwise taken into account, some o f the effects would be recorded in his explanations. An effect must at least be as its cause in strength. On the other hand, simply some of the case would end up disappear or not be perceived. Descartes gave arguments in his favour. Therefore, his external explanation does not fit with the first law of thermodynamics (Flanagan, 2007). If we can never know if humans have a nonphysical or spiritual aspect, the point of establishing scientific psychology is relevant. The argument above bases on empiricism as it is imperative in science. It states that the only source of our knowledge come through our senses.

Lay investiture Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Lay investiture - Research Paper Example Kings had taken some duties and trappings entitled to priests while some priests and bishops governed as feudal lords. The church lacked the governing power because the pope did not have coercive power to implement ecclesiastical policies. As such, it was necessary to employ the secular arm that was willing to implement the will of papacy. The monarchies saw the new action of papacy as usurping their power and as a result, conflicts emerged (De-La-Noy 1993, 72). During the time when Norman rule was established in England, there was a great need for change in the relationship between secular and church authorities. Gregorian reforms, which favored a central authority of Rome when dealing with local churches in Europe, were not fully accepted by Western Europe’s kings and monarchies. There was an increase in the effectiveness and scale of papal influence in local churches. At the same time, the powerful government established by Norman monarchy in England often opposed the influ ence and intervention of the pope in the affairs of local churches. As such, papal intervention and interference by the monarchy in the affairs of local churches led to investiture conflicts. ... After the death of William in 1100, Anselm returned to England after being invited by a newly installed King Henry 1. Anselm supported Henry’s rise to the throne against a protracted conflict with his brother, Robert. However, due to respect for papal decree, Anselm declined to support Henry’s demand to honor him and obey his commands. In addition, Anselm rejected to consecrate bishops that the king wanted. Henry did not want to quarrel with him while at the same time, he did not want to compromise the monarchy’s rights to homage and investiture (De-La-Noy 1993, 74). Despite mutual respect between Henry and Anselm, there was a direct conflict between them. Henry, who was not as violent as his predecessor Rufus, was resolute. He summoned Anselm and insisted that he pay homage by consecrating the bishop and priests that he had proposed, or he would leave the country. Anselm did not take any of the two options offered by Henry because he had deep conviction that he had to respect the pope, and it was his personal decision to either accept or decline the king’s demands. The conflict compelled the two to send emissaries to Rome in order to negotiate ways of solving their conflict. Pope Pascal II answered back by praising the king’s faithfulness on the matter but maintained his predecessor’s stand that forbade investiture and homage (Wilhelm 1990, 44). After a series of negotiations conducted by the king’s emissaries and the pope, there was some compromise in which Henry was allowed to invest in some bishop, but the 1102 letter by Pope Paschal II did not touch on homage but criticized investiture fervently. The Roman Council, which was attended by