The Three Major Ethical Approaches Managers Might Use in Making Ethical Choices

There are three major ethical approaches that managers might use in making an ethical choice - a utilitarian or consequence approach, a negative or positive rights approach, or a virtue-based ethical reasoning approach. Here is a description of the three approaches and the advantages and disadvantages of each one.

Using a Utilitarian or Consequence-Based Approach

A utilitarian or consequence-based manager would look at the possible choices for taking a certain action in light of the results of doing one thing versus another. For example, suppose that the manager could earn extra money from fees or contributions from patrons from putting on a certain program or that the city is offering to sponsor a recreational sports program like boxing, but the program would negatively impact a small group of people in the neighborhood who would risk damage to their property from attendees or a high level of noise during the activity. Also, there might be a risk of injury to some of the players participating, though they would have to sign waivers that they are assuming the responsibility for any injury. In the consequence-based approach, the manager would look at this event from a cost-benefits perspective and decide that most people in the community would enjoy this activity and that the organization would make more money from offering the program, and would have little financial risk due to injuries because of the waivers signed by participants. The manager would also dismiss the neighbors complaining about possible property damage and noise, since this would seem to be of lesser concern compared to the popularity of and income from the event.

The Three Major Ethical Approaches Managers Might Use in Making Ethical Choices

The advantage of operating as a utilitarian manager is it might bring in more money and provide a popular form of entertainment that draws a large crowd. Also, the manager might be correct in weighing the potential risk of damage or injury against the potential financial gain from the event, as well as the possibility of bringing in new member of the organization from attendees. However, the disadvantage is that this approach disregards the rights of the minority who don't want the event - the neighbors who will be negatively impacted by it. Another disadvantage is that the manager using this approach might under estimate the negative costs of the event, in that the angry neighbors might sue for property damage or for damages due to the high noise level in a residential neighborhood, leading to a costly suit the organization might lose. Secondly, there could be injuries not only to participants but to spectators at the event, and the participants might be able to set aside any waiver they signed by making good legal arguments, such as being underage or feeling coerced to participate. Another disadvantage is that this cost-benefits approach might result in negative publicity for the organization and the city, as a result of the press highlighting the plight of the neighbors or the potential injury of the participants, and presenting the organization as being unconcerned about the interests of the community members.

Using a Negative or Positive Rights Approach

A manager using negative or positive rights as a basis for decisions using the deontological ethics model or rule-based ethics would take into consideration whether he or she has a duty or obligation to act or not act in a certain way. Based on positive rights, the manager would have a duty to take certain action to others, whereas based on negative rights, the manager would have a duty to not take any action. The chosen action to take would in turn be influenced by whether an individual has certain rights as a human being, such as the right to be treated fairly, or due to the individual's status in society, such as the right not to be discriminated against because of that person's race, or age.

A manager might be confronted by such a decision in a recreational program which is designed to appeal to individuals of all sexes and ages in the community who pay a monthly or yearly membership fee or pay for each event or class they attend. However, the manager may find that some of the community members have difficulty participating in some of the classes, because they lack some basic skills, such as using a computer; have a disability making it hard to participate in exercise classes; or have financial difficulties preventing them from enrolling in classes or paying for a monthly or yearly membership. Using the negative or positive rights model, the manager would have to decide if he or she has any special obligation to accommodate the community members who have a difficulty accessing the programs and if any obligations take priority.

The advantage of this model is it would help the manager determine if he or she has any special obligation to those who are disadvantaged from participating in the program, and this analysis might show that he or she can make some reasonable accommodations to help the disadvantaged person, but otherwise has no further obligation, since this is a voluntary program which is available to those who wish to participate. However, individuals don't have to participate, such as might be the case if this was a school. Also, relieving the manager of a special duty of care is that center is supported by the fees of participants rather than being funded as a government agency and therefore taxpayers' money. Thus, since the center depends on the fees of participants, the manager is driven by putting on programs that are supported by those fees. For example, if there is sufficient interest, the manager might add a class on basic computer skills; a special exercise class for those with a disability; or create a program where those with financial difficulties could volunteer to help the center in return for reduced fees or no fees. But the manager has no special obligation to offer those activities without financial support. Accordingly, if there wasn't enough interest to make it financially feasible to add these programs, the center would have no duty or obligation to provide them.

The disadvantage of this approach is that it might leave those who don't have the ability or the funds unable to participate in programs at the center and they might feel it unfair. Should enough of them feel this way, this could lead to individual or class action lawsuits to require the organization provide an opportunity to participate. But in this situation, I think the center would prevail, since it has no obligation to provide these extra services if it determines there is not enough interest to warrant adding them, since it has an obligation to its owners or shareholders to continue to make a profit in order to sustain itself as an organization and continue to provide the recreational services it does.

Using the Virtue-Based Ethical Reasoning Approach

A manager using virtue-based ethical reasoning to make decisions would do so based on the kind of person s/he is or how s/he thinks of him or herself in the manager role. While such a manager might want to look at the rules or code of ethics for the organization or might want to consider the costs and benefits of a certain action, the manager would also want to make a decision in keeping with his or her conscience or sense of acting with integrity. In so doing, he or she would want to do what seems like the "right" thing to do in light of the circumstances, which might take into consideration the ethical teachings of his or her religious faith, particularly if the manager is working with a faith based organization, such as a church, temple, or mosque, that provides recreational activities to its members.

An example of using virtue-based ethical reasoning might occur if a manager of a recreational program for kids has to deal with a problem of bullying, where a stronger child is bullying another child in the program, so that the younger, weaker child is afraid to continue to participate and his parents are concerned. At the same time, the child who is the bully is the son of a prominent family in the community who are contributors to the program and don't recognize the problem. If the manager used a utilitarian cost-benefits approach to deciding what to do, he or she might tend to support the prominent family and tell the family of the weaker child that he can drop out of the program or participate in a different program where he won't have to confront the child he is afraid of. If the manager used a rule based on rights by status approach, he or she might side with the parents of the younger weaker child and prevent the bully from coming to the program, because he has disobeyed the rules about bullying, regardless of any repercussions from the parents. However, if the manager uses a virtue-based approach, he or she might take steps to find a solution that reconciles the relationships between everyone based on his or her beliefs about what is the right thing to do. For instance, he or she might draw on his or her faith that preaches understanding and forgiveness to bring everyone together to have a discussion about the problem. Such a discussion might include both children and their parents, and he or she might create a safe space where everyone feels free to share. The weaker child might talk about how he feels afraid, while the bully might talk about his reasons for bullying, that could include feeling bullied by other children and feeling he has to prove himself. Then, the manager might talk about the importance of forgiveness and how he or she would like to promote understanding, so the children could get along, and their parents could help them do so.

The advantage of using this virtue-based approach to choose a discussion of the problem in a spirit of forgiveness is this discussion would help to bring out the issues and bring the people involved closer together. It would creates a spirit of unity, in which everyone can work together to resolve the problem, much like when a mediator brings together parties in conflict and facilitates them solving the problem, rather than imposing a solution or taking sides based on the two other ethical principles.

However, a disadvantage of this approach is that in some cases, such as this, it can take much longer to reach a decision, much like the collaboration method of resolving a conflict, if the manager thinks the ethical thing to do is to bring together all the parties to work towards forgiveness. Another disadvantage of the approach in this case is that the parties involved in the difficult situation may not want to meet together to work towards a solution, or if the parties do meet, they may not feel comfortable talking through the situation and working towards understanding or forgiveness. Then, too, because it may take more time to reach a decision, the use of this approach could prove more costly to the organization due to the staff time involved in having meetings to jointly achieve a resolution. However, I think where warranted, this kind of discussion resulting from applying a virtue-based approach is a good approach to use, because it can reach a fairer, more equitable resolution that all parties can agree on, because they have been part of the resolution process.

The Three Major Ethical Approaches Managers Might Use in Making Ethical Choices
Check For The New Release in Health, Fitness & Dieting Category of Books NOW!
Check What Are The Top Cooking Books in Last 90 Days Best Cheap Deal!
Check For Cookbooks Best Sellers 2012 Discount OFFER!
Check for Top 100 Most Popular Books People Are Buying Daily Price Update!
Check For 100 New Release & BestSeller Books For Your Collection

GINI GRAHAM SCOTT, Ph.D., J.D., is a nationally known writer, consultant, speaker, and seminar/workshop leader, specializing in recreation and leisure, business and work relationships, and in professional and personal development. She has published over 50 books on diverse subjects, including MAKING ETHICAL CHOICES, RESOLVING ETHICAL DILEMMAS. Other recent books include: PLAYING THE LYING GAME, ENJOY! 101 LITTLE WAYS TO ADD MORE FUN TO YOUR WORK EVERYDAY; and A SURVIVAL GUIDE FOR WORKING WITH HUMANS...MANAGING EMPLOYEES FROM HELL...and WORKING WITH BAD BOSSES. She has been a featured expert guest on hundreds of TV and radio programs, including Oprah and Good Morning America. She hosts a weekly talk radio show CHANGEMAKERS, featuring the latest developments in science, technology, business, and society at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/changemakers. She also writes books for clients. Her Website is at http://www.changemakerspublishingandwriting.com. She has a Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of California in Berkeley, a J.D. from the University of San Francisco Law School, and M.A.s in Anthropology; Organizational/Consumer/Audience Behavior, and Popular Culture and Lifestyles from California State University, East Bay. She is getting an MS in Recreation and Tourism.

mobile phone watches Discounted Genuine Gm Parts 20793342 Driver Side Front

Characteristics of Leisure

In "Motivational Foundations of Leisure" by Seppo E. Iso-Ahola and "Pathways to Meaning-Making Through Leisure-Like Pursuits in Global Contexts" by Yoshitaka Iwasaki, both authors are grappling with distinguishing leisure from other aspects of human life. To this end, they are trying to describe the basic characteristics that identify something as leisure as opposed to something not being leisure. However, the big problem for both of them is the elusive definition of "what is leisure," since it is difficult to describe its characteristics if it hard to distinguish leisure from what is not leisure. This problem is made even more difficult in modern society, in that there is something of a continuum between leisure and non-leisure, with many activities seeming like a mix of the two.

For example, a part-time entrepreneur who sets up a party-plan business is engaging in an economic activity, but it is also fun for her (usually the entrepreneur is a woman), and she might see organizing sales parties as a side venture to something she considers work. So maybe this business starts out as a leisure activity, but as she makes more and more money, she may spend more and more time putting on parties to build a serious business. Thus, at some point, holding these fun parties may cease to be a leisure activity - but exactly when this occurs can be hard to tell.

This same problem of distinguishing leisure and not-leisure confronts both Iso-Ahola and Iwasaki in trying to discuss the characteristics of leisure, in that many of these characteristics they use to describe leisure can be true of non-leisure activities, commonly considered work. Iwasaki tries to get around this problem by calling things that he characterizes as aspects of leisure as "leisure-like" activities, and by the same token, one might character what people normally call work as "work-like" activities, but this is really more of a semantic sleight of hand. Calling something "leisure-like" -- or "work-like" for that matter -- merely provides a nomenclature that is fuzzier to identify a part of human life that is hard to define. In other words, using a fuzzy term to define what is considered an elusive hard-to-define quality simply points up the fuzziness, but it does not help to clarify the basic characteristics of what is leisure as compared to other aspects of human life.

Characteristics of Leisure

For example, in the "Motivational Foundations of Leisure," Iso-Ahola seeks to find an explanation for what is leisure in the "basic innate (psychological) needs that are the main energizers of human growth and potential." From his perspective, this need which everyone is born with both defines what people consider leisure and directs them to be involved under various conditions to satisfy those needs. Given this driving need for leisure, then, Iso-Ahola suggests that having a sense of freedom or autonomy is "the central defining characteristic of leisure". However, he distinguishes this feeling of freedom from the everyday characterization of leisure as "free time", which people use for describing the time when they are not working, since only some of this free time may truly be free from any obligations so someone can do exactly what they want to do.

For instance, if someone performs chores during this free time period, this time would not be truly free, although Iso-Ahola suggests that the more a person thinks of his work as an obligation, the more free that person would feel when he is engaged in nonwork activities, and therefore that activity might truly be considered leisure.

From this perspective, then, if a person truly enjoys their work and participates in a variety of activities that contribute to success at work, though these activities might otherwise be considered leisure for someone who engages in these activities for reasons that have nothing to do with their job, these activities might no longer be considered leisure. An example of this is the salesman or CEO for a company that plays golf with other potential customers. On the one hand, golf is normally regarded as a leisure-time recreational activity. But it has become part of the salesman's or CEO's work, even though the salesman or CEO may freely choose to play golf or not, or engage in an alternate form of entertainment with prospective clients, such as taking them to a show or ballgame. If that person plays golf, goes to a show, or is a spectator at a ball game with members of his family and no work buddies are present, that might be more properly characterized as leisure. But in many cases, the salesman/CEO might take the family along on a golfing, show, or ballgame excursion with his work buddies, thereby muddying the conception of leisure. Under the circumstances, using a continuum from non-leisure to leisure activities might be a good way to characterize different types of leisure, rather than trying to make a distinction between what is leisure and what is not-leisure.

In any event, building on this notion that freedom is a basic characteristic of leisure, Iso-Ahola suggests that leisure activity is characterized by behavior that is self-determined, or which may start off as determined, but can become self-determined by the process of "internalization" Therefore, to the extent that people perform everyday activities because they want to do so, they make them leisure-like. An example might be if I hate gardening (which I really do), but I start doing it because I can't afford to hire a gardener, and eventually I start to feel joy in it, which would turn it into a leisure activity. (But since I can hire a gardener, I have no compelling reason to do this, so for now this is definitely not a leisure-time activity for me).

Then, too, according to Iso-Ahola, leisure might be characterized by escaping, which can contribute to internalizing an activity, which makes it even more a form of leisure.

Iso-Ahola brings together all of these ideas into a pyramid in which the greater one's intrinsic motivation and sense of self-determination, the more one is engaging in true leisure outside of the work context. On the bottom is obligatory nonwork activity participation, such as chores one has to perform in the house. On the next level above this, he distinguishes free-time activity participation in TV and exercise, which he feels are usually not true leisure, since people are not truly autonomous in participating in either activity. He claims people lack autonomy in watching TV, because they don't really want to do this and it doesn't make them feel good about themselves (though this opinion of TV is questionable), and in the case of exercise, he claims that they feel they should do this because it's good for them, rather than because they want to. Finally, at the top of the pyramid is full leisure participation, where one feels complete autonomy and freedom, so one gains intrinsic rewards, a feeling of flow, and social interaction with others.

Finally, to briefly cite Iwasaki's approach to characterizing leisure, he seeks to describe leisure as a way of generating certain types of meanings, although the particular meanings may differ for people experiencing different life experiences or coming from different cultures. In Iwasaki's view, citing the World Leisure Association's description of leisure, meaningful leisure provides "opportunities for self-actualization and further contribution to the quality of community life." As such, leisure includes self-determined behavior, showing competence, engaging in social relationships, having an opportunity for self-reflection and self-affirmation, developing one's identity, and overcoming negative experiences in one's life. Iwasaki also goes on to describe the five key factors which are aspects of leisure (which he prefers to call"leisure-like" pursuits: 1) positive emotions and well-being, 2) positive identities, self-esteem, and spirituality; 3) social and cultural connections and harmony, 4) human strengths and resilience, and 5) learning and human development across the lifespan.

Characteristics of Leisure
Check For The New Release in Health, Fitness & Dieting Category of Books NOW!
Check What Are The Top Cooking Books in Last 90 Days Best Cheap Deal!
Check For Cookbooks Best Sellers 2012 Discount OFFER!
Check for Top 100 Most Popular Books People Are Buying Daily Price Update!
Check For 100 New Release & BestSeller Books For Your Collection

GINI GRAHAM SCOTT, Ph.D., J.D., is a nationally known writer, consultant, speaker, and seminar/workshop leader, specializing in recreation and leisure, business and work relationships and in professional and personal development. She has published over 50 books on diverse subjects. Her latest books include: THE VERY NEXT NEW THING, PLAYING THE LYING GAME, WANT IT, SEE IT, GET IT!; ENJOY! 101 LITTLE WAYS TO ADD MORE FUN TO YOUR WORK EVERYDAY; and A SURVIVAL GUIDE FOR WORKING WITH HUMANS...MANAGING EMPLOYEES FROM HELL...and WORKING WITH BAD BOSSES. She is founder and director of Changemakers Publishing and Writing and Changemakers Productions, and has been a featured expert guest on hundreds of TV and radio programs, including Oprah and Good Morning America. She is the host of a weekly syndicated talk radio talk, CHANGEMAKERS, featuring interviews and commentary on various topics. Her Websites are at http://www.changemakerspublishingandwriting.com and http://www.ginigrahamscott.com. She has a Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of California in Berkeley, a J.D. from the University of San Francisco Law School, and M.A.s in Anthropology; Mass Communications and Organizational/Consumer/Audience Behavior, and Popular Culture and Lifestyles from California State University, East Bay. She is getting an MS in Recreation and Tourism.

cell phone watches Discounted Discounted Bronze Finish Lion Fountain Low Price Mmf Industries Tamper Evident Cash Bags

How Leisure Shapes and Is Shaped by Society

Leisure both shapes and is shaped by society, and is such is both an independent variable (which does the shaping) and a dependent variable (which is shaped by various elements in society which act as independent variables). This discussion of the role of leisure in society has been primarily led by sociologists, using both structure-functional and symbolic interactionist approaches, as discussed by John R. Kelly in "Leisure and Society: A Dialectical Analysis. In his analysis, leisure primarily is a dependent variable, which is shaped by work and time, family and community, age and the life course, culture, social development, and political policy.

Work can shape leisure in various ways, and it also is affected by the particular type of work one does and one's position on the job. While the time one is off from work can provide a time frame in which to engage in leisure, the amount of time off from one's job is shaped by the type of work one does, as well as by one's income level and whether one has other contributors to one's income (such as a working spouse or working children in the household) or whether one is involved in a second job, either because of economic necessity since one doesn't earn enough from the first job, or by choice, such as if one hopes to develop this work on the side into a full time business.

At the same time, the particular type of leisure one engages in is shaped by one's job and one's associates there, as well as by any organized leisure activity sponsored by one's company. One's gender and age may also play a part in shaping the leisure one engages in. For example, older male factory workers may enjoy going to the bar after work as a form of leisure, while older female factory workers might like going to fun sales parties to see jewelry and fashion displays after work. By contrast, younger female factory workers might like hanging out in the mall shopping, while older male factory works might like to go to a local lounge.

How Leisure Shapes and Is Shaped by Society

While managerial employees, company owners, and entrepreneurs might enjoy some of these same activities, they might make different choices in the particular form of the activity. For instance, instead of going to a bar that caters mainly to male factory workers, they might go to a more expensive lounge or night club that caters to both men and women. And the women who go shopping might choose to go to more expensive shops and boutiques, instead of stores like Ross which cater to lower income clients who want to save money. Then, too, managerial employees, company owners, and entrepreneurs might participate in other types of activities, such as networking events sponsored by groups like the local Chamber of Commerce that have an element of leisure, in that they are fun events, where people can relax and talk about non-work activities, but for some people, these are also work-related, in that they provide opportunities for sales and marketing leads for those in sales and for clients for those in professions like writing, legal services, and PR.

Income can also shape leisure in affecting what one can afford to spend. For instance, while people of any gender and age might go out to eat, someone with a higher income may be able to spend more in a luxury restaurant, where they can enjoy fine cuisine and wines, such as at a French or German restaurant, while those with lower incomes may eat at a fast food restaurant like a Burger King, McDonald's, or Wendy's, or they might choose lower priced ethnic cuisine, such as at a Chinese, Thai, or Vietnamese restaurant. And race and ethnicity can shape food choices, too, such as when members of an ethnic group tend to go to restaurants offering their own ethnic food.

Then, too, while income can shape leisure choices because of what one can afford, class can play a part aside from income in affecting what one considers an appropriate choice of activity. For instance, a high status person could easily afford to enjoy many lower cost forms of leisure, but social norms might prevent that person from doing so, such as when it might be considered inappropriate by an upper class family for a family member to go to a wrestling match or cock fighting event, since those are considered to be lower class activities. At times, an upper class member may escape derision of his or her peers by describing what he or she is doing as "slumming" - enjoying "low friends in low places" as the popular Garth Brooks song puts it. But a high status person continues to participate in such low status activities, he or she could jeopardize his or her social standing, which sometimes leads high power people to lead double lives, where they enjoy a type of leisure not considered appropriate for their high class position.

The family and community context can similarly shape leisure activity, since one may be introduced to certain leisure activities by members of one's family or friends, since as Kelly points out "most leisure takes place in or around the home" and "the most common leisure companions are family and other close friends and intimates." For example, if many family members or friends enjoy bowling or shopping at the mall, a person is likely to join them, and then having been introduced to that activity, he or she may continue to participate in that activity with other people.

Likewise, as one ages over the life course, the leisure activities one is attracted to can change. Though at one time sociologists seemed to think that these leisure activities contracted as one aged, so for example, there was a decline in participation in sports activity, this view is clearly incorrect, because while one may participate less in one activity, one will participate more in other activities. For instance, those who are younger may be more apt to participate in active physical sports, like football, hockey, and wrestling, whereas those who are older may turn to other less physical sports, such as bocce ball. And while younger travelers may be more drawn to trips involving more physical activity, such as adventure travel, older travelers may be more apt to go on cruises. Moreover, a life course rather than an aging approach seems more appropriate today, since many older individuals are very physically fit since they eat healthy food and exercise regularly, while some younger individuals are out of shape and obese, due to unhealthy eating and a lack of exercise.

Then, too, leisure might be shaped by technological developments in society, since new technologies become the basis for leisure activities. For instance, the development of GSP devices has given rise to geocaching, since President Clinton made this technology, originally developed for the military and considered classified, available to everyday citizens in the 1990s. Another example is the way the Segway, which was developed primarily as a new form of transportation, in which one person stands on a platform with wheels and maneuvers it with a steering wheel, gave rise to the sport of Segway polo. And online games, such as Farmville and Mafia Wars, have been made possible by social networking software and fast online connections.

However, these are all examples of the way leisure is shaped by social conditions. Leisure also has the power to shape society. A key way it can do so is when a leisure activity becomes so popular that it becomes the basis for a new form of work and contributes to jobs or when it shapes the way people interact with each other. For instance, at one time people engaged in sports like baseball, football, and soccer just for fun. But gradually, the popularity of these sports led to the creation of large industries devoted to the sport that shaped fan behavior and purchases. Similarly, the new sport of geocaching has led to not only Websites and paraphernalia sold to geocachers, but it has provided a technique for some work coaches and consultants to use in teambuilding in the workplace.

Another example of the way leisure shapes society is shown by the power of popular entertainment, such as music, movies, and TV, to shape everyday culture. Fans are inspired by the top performers in these fields, who have become celebrities, to help them decide what to wear, what perfume or cologne to buy, and what books to read (such as when Oprah suggests a title she likes). In turn, advertisers, seeing the power of these celebrities created by leisure activities to shape opinion, have hired them to sell their brands to others. Similarly, the toy industry have used celebrity endorsers on TV program to help sell toys to kids, thereby using one form of leisure activity to sell another.

Thus, in many ways, leisure is both shaped by society and culture and shapes it.

How Leisure Shapes and Is Shaped by Society
Check For The New Release in Health, Fitness & Dieting Category of Books NOW!
Check What Are The Top Cooking Books in Last 90 Days Best Cheap Deal!
Check For Cookbooks Best Sellers 2012 Discount OFFER!
Check for Top 100 Most Popular Books People Are Buying Daily Price Update!
Check For 100 New Release & BestSeller Books For Your Collection

GINI GRAHAM SCOTT, Ph.D., J.D., is a nationally known writer, consultant, speaker, and seminar/workshop leader, specializing in recreation and leisure, business and work relationships and in professional and personal development. She has published over 50 books on diverse subjects. Her latest books include: THE VERY NEXT NEW THING, PLAYING THE LYING GAME, WANT IT, SEE IT, GET IT!; ENJOY! 101 LITTLE WAYS TO ADD MORE FUN TO YOUR WORK EVERYDAY; and A SURVIVAL GUIDE FOR WORKING WITH HUMANS...MANAGING EMPLOYEES FROM HELL...and WORKING WITH BAD BOSSES. She is founder and director of Changemakers Publishing and Writing and Changemakers Productions, and has been a featured expert guest on hundreds of TV and radio programs, including Oprah and Good Morning America. She is the host of a weekly syndicated talk radio talk, CHANGEMAKERS, featuring interviews and commentary on various topics. Her Websites are at http://www.changemakerspublishingandwriting.com and http://www.ginigrahamscott.com. She has a Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of California in Berkeley, a J.D. from the University of San Francisco Law School, and M.A.s in Anthropology; Mass Communications and Organizational/Consumer/Audience Behavior, and Popular Culture and Lifestyles from California State University, East Bay. She is getting an MS in Recreation and Tourism.

watch cell phone Cheap Maxell Cleaning Tape Sdlt 1 S4 Discounted Genuine Gm Parts 20793342 Driver Side Front Cheap Dispenser Kit For Liquid Detergent

Dr JJ Hurtak - A Man Ahead of His Time

We live in an age where everything has its place! Science is one thing, quite separate from religion which is another. Dr. J. J. Hurtak, however, has integrated these seemingly disparate fields of study and uncovered the harmony between them.

The best-selling book "The Da Vinci Code" prompted many scholars to look to the similarities between science and religion and how they may complement each other. Dr. Hurtak has been doing this for years.

Prior to Dan Brown's best-seller, Dr. Carl Sagan discussed the conflicts between scientists and theologians in his book "Contact" and the movie made from it. This discussion has raged for over a century between academics of different disciplines, with no one giving an inch.

Dr JJ Hurtak - A Man Ahead of His Time

For over 35 years, Dr. J.J. Hurtak has been pointing out the commonalities and reinforcing nature between comparative religion and the social sciences. Disciplines like anthropology, archaeology, history, linguistics and the hard sciences of mathematics, physics, biology, neurology, astronomy and cosmology are complementary, Hurtak claims - and he has spent his professional life proving it. Often when experts in different fields are brought together, they feel at odds with one another. Dr. Hurtak, however, through his diverse scholarship and study, has worked to bring divergent disciplines together. He builds consensus in an evolutionary move toward synthesis, hoping that bridging these disciplines will introduce a more harmonious life for all humankind through the synergy and insight of multiple disciplines.

In other words, what Hurtak is asking us to do is to open our hearts and minds to other academic disciplines, other cultural ideas and different religious and political viewpoints for the mutual benefit of creating a better future for all of us. What follows is my interview and interpretation of Dr. Hurtak's work and why some of it is misunderstood.

One of his positive visions for planet Earth is to see the unity of peoples and a movement to establish peaceful relationships among all of us. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. called out this same message in church and from the head of protest lines during the peace movement of the 1960's, and other progressives did the same. Some people are now carrying that same banner into the new millennia, and Dr. J.J. Hurtak clearly is one of them.

Hurtak is not just a beauty pageant contestant spouting platitudes about unity and world peace. He is a world renowned scholar asking other experts and scientists to see the similarities between religion and science and to consider how they can work together for positive change.

Yes, he's trying to get science and religion to work together! Historically, anybody who has supported the more speculative sciences or tried to combine multiple disciplines and theories met with considerable resistance and malice from the general academic community.

How hard was it to get doctors to consider the germ theory of disease, after hundreds of years of agreement that disease arose spontaneously from the ether. Although the germ theory was resisted at first, it is now a cornerstone of modern science.

Dr. J.J. Hurtak, Ph.D., Ph.D. (University of California and University of Minnesota) is opening minds to new ways of looking at the world, and this includes religion, science, history and the human condition.

Hurtak is a scholar and academic with no particular axe to grind, but if you were to try to distill his work into a short phrase, it would be that he is a futurist working to bring people together and raise consciousness. And he is meeting with considerable success with this all over the world.

In his desire to bring people together Dr. Hurtak taught courses on African studies at the California State University, Northridge (CSUN) and was privileged to be a participant at the historical reception of the Chinese Ping-Pong team at the University of California in Los Angeles (UCLA) in 1972 with Governor Edmund Brown. This was the start of open door relations between the United States and the People's Republic of China.

In a side chapter on American-Far Eastern relations, Dr. Hurtak worked to bring Chinese acupuncture texts to America. He helped to advance Chinese acupuncture medicine, which is now a serious and acceptable discipline, acknowledged by the American medical profession and a legitimate practice recognized by legal and medical experts throughout the world.

Also in the 1970's, Hurtak was able to work with scholars behind the scenes in helping to microfilm sacred Tibetan texts, an important historical move in preserving some of the world's most ancient texts of astronomy and medicine. This has helped to further the understanding of an important early chapter in global history.

For 30 years, Hurtak has visited South Africa and worked with the Zulu Shaman, Credo Mutwa, to promote and preserve African culture and music, long before the end of apartheid.

Hurtak's work has continued to span many disciplines in seeking ways to create a positive dialogue for our future. In the 1980's he was a director of Technology Marketing Analysis Corporation (TMAC) and helped to establish a strong dialogue between engineers, scientists and government leaders looking for answers to the oil embargo and the need for real energy alternatives. With Hurtak's encouragement, TMAC became well-known through its creation of the annual Renewable Energy Technology Symposium and International Exposition (RETSIE) Conference at Anaheim, California, where thousands of leading engineers and businessmen were brought together to look ahead and to honor Nobel Prize winners like Dr. Glenn T. Seaborg who changed the meaning of the energy equation. Hurtak took action to meet the energy challenge and to help young and old to see the importance of sustainability.

More recently, Dr. Hurtak along with his organization The Academy for Future Science (AFFS) has been helping the Xavante people of Brazil with ways of improving agriculture and educational futures, working to provide for genuine sustainability with new agricultural centers and opportunities for preparing their young people to go on to higher education.

Working with many musicians around the world, Hurtak has introduced humanistic and spiritual musical themes. Some of these musicians have included Gilberto Gil from Brazil and Alice Coltrane, wife of famous jazz saxophonist John Coltrane. Hurtak's work with Alice at the New Jersey Center of the Performing Arts was written up in The New York Times (2006) in an article regarding the introduction of "supersoul" music, but Hurtak prefers to see it as a spiritual renewal of unity through song and the celebration of "mantric" language.

In the field of literature, Hurtak consulted with the internationally known writer, Sidney Sheldon, on changes within the human psyche for the novel "The Doomsday Conspiracy". Sidney Sheldon's books have sold millions of copies throughout the world.

Sheldon came to Hurtak because Hurtak was the first to confirm extraterrestrial experiments with the human race. In 1979, in an El Universal news conference (Mexico City), he pointed out the need to talk openly about these and other important issues facing humanity. In 1995, he was a speaker at the historic first disclosure conference in Washington D.C. "When Cosmic Cultures Meet" sponsored by the Human Potential Foundation. This special gathering discussed the reality of cosmic visitations. Hurtak continues to encourage scholars, governments and scientists to talk openly about these controversial subjects.

As a well-known lecturer and author, Hurtak is respected for his knowledge of anthropology, future science and social science. Hurtak is working hard all over the world in an effort to unite rather than divide. As with all who preceded him in this endeavor, he has found many detractors. Some people misstate Hurtak's words to forward their own position. Others have misunderstood Hurtak's meaning because they do not have the background to be able to understand his writings.

Hurtak has always respected and found points of mutual agreement in his comparative religious studies and other studies. It is the misinterpretations of his religious scholarship that detractors have criticized him for the most.

For example, while teaching classes on the Dead Sea Scrolls, in the 1960's, Hurtak pointed out that it was the Muslim world's academics and scientists who helped to pass on the heritage of the Classical and Hellenic world to Europe.

Hurtak has unceasingly worked to build bridges between peoples. This task is no small undertaking. He travels the world as a lecturer, speaking publicly together with his wife who shares his philosophy and environmental concerns.

Inclusion not Exclusion

He is the author of over fourteen books. His latest book is "The End of Suffering" with co-author Russell Targ.

His books are sociological and rarely political. In fact he tries to steer clear of politics to avoid the divisiveness and polarity that is attached to politics.

Hurtak's most recent travels show what he has accomplished lately. Much of his fame stems from work he did years ago in comparative religion, and while he still works in this arena, he is now very involved in more comprehensive things. He just returned to the United States from the Parliament of the World's Religions in Australia, where he was an honorary ambassador, as well as a speaker.

Hurtak has achieved recognition through this worldwide organization as well as through his ongoing scholarly contributions in comparative religion with an emphasis on commonalities between different religions. Yet his detractors attack his reputation regardless of his good works.

Much of Hurtak's work is of a metaphysical nature. He uses concepts involving ancient history and languages. Part of the problem with his critics is that they often misinterpret Hurtak's work by trying to simplify concepts that are not simple.

His extensive work in comparative religion cannot be reduced to simplistic phrases and cliches. Hurtak speaks, for example, of the black stone in Mecca as representing the energies of our changing life and changing three-dimensional universe, an assessment that is in accord with Muslim legends that the black cube contains something sacred that fell to earth at the time of Adam and that has absorbed the sins of humanity. Misrepresenting Hurtak's words out of context, detractors have tried to use this statement from his book as a charge against him: Rather than relating his statement to the world's traditional mythologies and religions and to modern science, with its ongoing investigation of the nature of dark energy and dark matter of which more than 95% of our universe is composed, they label Hurtak as critical of the Moslem faith.

His position, stated in the voice of a metaphysicist, is not a political opinion. Hurtak's statements, taken in context, point out similarities in the major religions of the world: European Christians make pilgrimages to one of the Black Madonnas, to be cleansed of sins and to make a new start on their spiritual paths, while Moslems make the rigorous pilgrimage to Mecca to the presence of the black stone, housed in the Kaaba, for purposes of worship and purification.

Visions and Revelations

The misstatements of Dr. Hurtak's critics create the divisions he is trying to heal. When challenged as to specifics, these critics become evasive. Some critics and detractors have tried to characterize the source of Hurtak's mystical writings as "channeling". For the student of comparative religions there are many synonyms for wireless communication with something God like. "Channeling" can be used as a catch-all term for any and all revealed extrasensory messages coming from some unexplainable source. Yet, in reality, channeling is only one method of receiving information; a vision is another. And there is another way of gaining higher knowledge, called by the ancients a "Revelation".

A vision may be anything from a physical and mental experience induced by drugs - i.e., Carlos Castaneda and the Piute nation (as well as other Native peoples who use drug assisted experiences) - to that of a greater understanding given as a Divine Gift. Visions may be induced by physical stress, fasting, physical exhaustion or fevers, but they can also be induced by religious disciplines: yoga, meditation, etc.

A "vision" is clearly a more general term than a Revelation. Revelation, be it by the presence of an angel or higher entity, such as a religious epiphany, is an inspirational awakening that imparts an understanding or knowledge. A vision can be a revelation. Channeling, in contrast, is the receiving of information given to a person by means of a controlling entity spoken through the party that is channeling.

Regardless of whether it was a vision, an epiphany or a revelation, Hurtak had such a wakeup call and tried to explain it in a book, over three decades ago, called "The Keys of Enoch ". His book is a scholarly work that does not lend itself to easy, glib explanations.

It has been suggested that Dr. Hurtak would be well served if he wrote up something along the lines of Dr. J.J. Hurtak Explained so it would be clearer what he is getting at.

When I interviewed Dr. Hurtak in California he had just returned from lecturing in Australia and was heading out to speak at universities around South Africa to try to bring a positive future. My goal was to get a clearer handle on this guy and then try to put in plain language what causes the confusion about him, his writings and his positions in the public consciousness.

People with doctorates, from my experience, sometimes isolate themselves by using a specialized language that attends their field. Dr. J.J. Hurtak has two doctorates and is an expert in several disciplines and has even muddied the waters further by mastering many languages both modern and ancient.

Unfortunately, complicated language or the technical use of terminology may be used against any author to further an agenda or to discredit the scholar.

As stated above, the terms vision and channeling have often been misapplied with regard to Hurtak who has openly and publicly stated that he does not support channeling.

Therefore, it is very easy, when dealing with the work of scholars such as Hurtak, Carl Gustav Jung, Carl Sagan and others, for conmen, charlatans, pundits and academic spin doctors to take catchphrases out of the context of a scholarly work and misunderstand the meaning of the author.

More often than not, disinformation is not necessarily used for disinformation purposes alone, but for slandering a topic and those who support that field who are trying to make a positive move forward in society. In reality, disinformation is false information or damaging information, generally untrue, used to discredit enemies.

In analyzing Hurtak's work it is important to understand that as a lawyer may use a specialized vocabulary, the anthropologist, archaeologist, or comparative religion specialist (Dr J.J. Hurtak) will likewise use terminology with a more precise meaning than that meaning generally understood by the public.

Dr. Hurtak wrote his book "The Book of Knowledge: The Keys of Enoch" based upon a revelation he had regarding: mathematics, history, comparative religion, archaeology, anthropology and linguistics for the future of humankind.

Revelation

Specifically, in 1973 Dr. Hurtak had what I would define as a "revelation" which means that a supernatural or rather, an infinite source "reveals" some information to the natural man who may then try to explain that information to others. This notion of getting insight from the supernatural, or God, if you will, was accepted during earlier eras as a given by many people that God or the gods revealed His (or their) will to humankind in some form or another. Since the dawn of classical modern philosophy, philosophers such as Kant and Plato have had discussions on the Noumena world (meta-physical real world beyond the five senses) vs. the phenomenal world (known by the five senses"). Nonetheless, especially since the Age of Enlightenment, the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, this belief in metaphysics has become less well-accepted among a growing segment of the population.

Hurtak had a personal revelation or epiphany and wrote a book to explain it. The subtle difference between channeling and revelation is important.

Neither Hurtak nor his organization, the Academy for Future Science have ever endorsed channeling. Though Dr. J.J. Hurtak is familiar with several famous channelers and may even respect their work, he does not endorse the process of channeling. Not surprisingly, there are just as many individuals who use Hurtak for their own credibility by tying their views, writings and opinions to Hurtak's work or to Hurtak himself, oftentimes without any real association with Dr. J.J. Hurtak or the Academy for Future Science.

Although Dr. Hurtak explained his experience in The Book of Knowledge: Keys of Enoch, this revelation and experience have been loosely described in various books by Hurtak's detractors in pursuit of their own interpretation and agendas. But these same people fail to point out the amazing facts he had in this book that were unknown at the time of writing.

For one, he calls our sun a 'variable star' in his book over thirty-six years ago. This important data was just recognized by NASA this past year (2010).

Second, he points out that there will be an unusual recognition of a change in the rotation of Saturn. This was noted by NASA with its comparison of the Voyager and Cassini probes, conducted in 2004. He also was the first to point out that star shafts of the Great Pyramid point to specific stars, "Mintaka, Aniltak, Anilam" in Orion, a point that Robert Bauval's co-author Adrian Gilbert from the book The Orion Mystery takes note of in his subsequent books. These are just a few of the myriad details that were written by Dr. Hurtak in the early 1970's that are now accepted and understood.

Consequently, Hurtak can be seen as a type of scientific prophet who is finally being understood by a humanity no longer dissuaded by scientific thinking having to be at odds with religion. In fact, he points out that the Name of God as the Tetragrammaton (Hebrew name of God) has a corresponding relation to the codons of the human DNA.

Certainly, there are those who completely do not understand what Dr. Hurtak is trying to say especially in the re-evaluation of important symbols. And The Keys use myriad symbols and pictures to illustrate consciousness development.

I like to think that is where the conflict and confusion comes in. For example, The Keys of Enoch speak of such terms as "Christ race" which is describing a people who have compassion and demonstrate a culture of peace just as Christ attempted to show. This represents an avant-garde people who use the Light of Christ consciousness as a spiritualized people of Light. Those who don't understand this have said Hurtak is speaking of a "Master race." The term "Race" has such a loaded meaning today that had Hurtak written the book today he may have used "Christ consciousness" since he was talking about the outlook or mindset of a group of people, not their genetic, religious, or national heritage.

Sometimes in discussion of the supernatural very important ideas get blurred. The popular press tries to make the controversy as accessible as possible to the widest audience. Hurtak and other scholars have entirely different audiences and are not necessarily seeking populist acceptance. He is not trying to answer the questions for everyone but is posing the question for everyone. Academics process their experiences through their training and come out the other end with their version of what happened, explained in their own words.

I have concluded that The Keys of Enoch is not a channeled work. It is a scholarly reporting of an experience the author had with a higher being wherein he experienced a great deal of information with his conscious mind (higher consciousness), and then reported it as filtered through his scholarly background.

It seems reasonable to any educated person that the reason Dr. Hurtak was chosen for this experience was that he, through hard work, scholarship, and willingness and openness to spiritual development, was qualified to reveal this experience to the world.

Being a somewhat skeptical reporter, I take all of the philosophical and metaphysical schools of thought with a grain of salt. However, I do take exception when journalists use sloppy writing style, poor or no fact checking and broad stroke characterization of other people's work; especially when they inject colloquialisms and imprecise language to explain spiritual matters.

Stargate Nonsense?

In researching this article I read many articles that had pros and cons about Dr. Hurtak. One of the most "uninformed", in my opinion, is "The Stargate Conspiracy" (by Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince) which lumped together a bunch of people who separately decided to investigate some of the archeology in Egypt as being involved in some 'secret conspiracy.' They took out of context fragments of Hurtak's work along with misstating his views to come to a conclusion that was more in accord with their own agenda as expressed in their multiple writings.

In my view, the irony about discussing "The Stargate Conspiracy," is that it elevates the authors' mis-interpretation as if it were a work of fact-checked scholarship. It is not!

Throughout the book, there is a lot of this kind of free associative writing in this genre. And correcting the conclusions is frustrating because they don't concern themselves with accuracy. The tabloids come to mind.

Why should anyone care? The only reason scholars try to set the record straight is that the record is their reputation.

A scholar and lecturer's reputation must be kept clean and highly polished to maintain credibility in order to continue working in the field.

Hurtak takes the trouble to guard his reputation regardless of the seemingly futile nature of the battles he has to fight to bring unity between the scientific mind and religious viewpoint.

Most careful readers of Hurtak appreciate his integrity. His detractors seem to disregard integrity in favor of hoped for mass audiences.

The "Nine" Confusion

A perfect example of this is the use of the terms "The Nine", "Lab Nine", "Council of Nine", from which the Stargate authors and others have determined, due to a reference in The Keys of Enoch, that Hurtak is associated with "THE NINE".

Strangely, Stargate wants you to think that "THE NINE" are some human governmental conspiracy group. Hurtak uses only the term "Council of Nine," in a very normal religious, scholarly context as relating to a Jungian archetype comparable to the nine Egyptian gods as mythological teaching figures and the nine ancient Greek gods again as Jungian archetypes.

Specifically, it is a metaphor or at least a description of angelic realities that probably would have nothing to do with governments on earth!

Hurtak's reference must be taken in context of scholarly writing. Hurtak is an academic in comparative religion, mythology, and anthropology, not a conspiracy buff. Hurtak defined the Council of Nine "as a tribunal of teachers governing our immediate super galactic and galactic region subject to change in evolving 'new programs' of the father's kingdom. " Although I struggle to understand his definition I am clear that he ain't talking about a quasi-governmental committee of humans.

In simple language, Hurtak is writing about an experience with an angelic or infinite type of being expressing knowledge from a creator source. We are talking about the infinite with our finite mind and limited language.

Further, Hurtak, through hard work earned two Ph.D.s, a fact that any journalist could confirm, if they would bother. Hurtak's background is not only comparative religion but anthropology and history. He is putting this group of nine teachers in the context that we have historically put messengers of the gods, or archetypes in.

Dr. Hurtak's metaphor is not "the Nine." Dr. Hurtak does not use that term in his book. He uses the term "Council of Nine." It makes no sense to conclude that he is talking about nine extraterrestrials or corporeal beings pulling the strings on humankind or that he, Dr. J.J. Hurtak, would qualify or choose to be one of this council since he considers himself a man, not an incorporeal being.

If one goes on the internet and types in "The Nine" or "Lab Nine" they would get many hits for a video game. They also might get a reference to the nine original gods of Greek Mythology or a whole set of conspiracy sites that confuse Dr. J.J. Hurtak's work with science fiction writers such as Gene Rodenberry and popular psychics such as Uri Geller and other writers such as Phyllis V. Schlemmer, who did write about "The Nine ".

Since Phyllis V. Schlemmer, Uri Geller, and a man named Puharich did work in parapsychology in the 1960's and 1970's, some authors jump to the conclusion that because Hurtak associated with and ran in the same circles of academics studying parapsychology; that they all had the same agenda, same beliefs, and are working with words of art in the same manner. This is obviously not true. He is trying to educate and inspire our world to think in terms of not only global ethics and human understanding, but an outlook that can embrace other galaxies and universes in their consciousness. Toward this end, he is concerned and active with both earth science and space law. He has published papers on a new set of space laws for peace on the "high frontier" and discussions about the multinational colonization of space.

Optimistically, I believe Hurtak is part of a new movement toward environmentally and socially active public consciousness.

If one reads the news, they could infer that over the past thirty years the Western world has lost its bearings and has begun to wager its future and lost its moral values. Ethics have given way to cynical opportunism in business, in finance, in politics and in life in general.

Guilt by Association

Finally, I cannot close this article without also laughing at the assertion that Hurtak worked for the C.I.A. based upon his association with Puharich.

It is alleged that Puharich worked for the C.I.A. I cannot say as he has been dead for over 15 years. In a recent interview and in discussion with people who have known Hurtak for several decades; it becomes clear that Hurtak was unaware of any association that Puharich may have had with the C.I.A. when they worked together.

Further, Hurtak's work in parapsychology included reviewing work by scholars all over the world, not just the U.S. He reviewed the works by other scholars in Russia, Sweden, Brazil, South Africa, Britain and all available information in the U.S.

If we were to believe modern movies, or just general common sense, we might conclude that our government and every other modern government in the world monitor the work of research scientists in various fields without ever directly contacting those scientists. Particularly if they knew that a scientist wouldn't feel comfortable working for a government intelligence agency.

Fact Checking

That is why good journalists try to talk with their subjects, check facts, and attempt to derive reasonable conclusions based upon facts.

Readers need to do the same and not believe everything written on the internet because it might be disinformation to keep them from delving deeper into the ideas of those who herald positive steps for making the world a better place.

Society prefers to keep the status quo, which means keeping you blocked from moving forward in your thinking. If we are blocked by not discerning "disinformation" when we see it, you remain locked in the old box of perpetual negativity. That is something I learned from Dr. Hurtak, who prefers to move people out of the old box into an informed and creative understanding.

In conclusion, Dr. J.J. Hurtak is a free-thinker, not anti- any religious group! He never worked for the intelligence community. And, he is working in a capacity to unite divergent philosophies not dominate them or lead them.

Hurtak is a scholar, a teacher, a lecturer and a man who should be honored for his contributions throughout the world. Although he challenges the normal paradigms, he goes to pains to offer explanation of his writings or ideas when asked.

He's a visionary and a good guy working for unity from east to west, north to south and should be given the respect he has earned. Pieces like this one, I hope, merely attempt to clarify any unintentional misunderstandings and direct the reader to make up their own mind after going to the source.

#########

By Andrew Morgan Copyright 2010 Andrew Morgan

Dr JJ Hurtak - A Man Ahead of His Time
Check For The New Release in Health, Fitness & Dieting Category of Books NOW!
Check What Are The Top Cooking Books in Last 90 Days Best Cheap Deal!
Check For Cookbooks Best Sellers 2012 Discount OFFER!
Check for Top 100 Most Popular Books People Are Buying Daily Price Update!
Check For 100 New Release & BestSeller Books For Your Collection

watches cell phone Discounted Discounted Bronze Finish Lion Fountain Cheap Maxell Cleaning Tape Sdlt 1 S4

Anthropology Online Schools

Online Anthropology Schools have the advantage of allowing students the pleasure of study in the privacy and convenience of their own homes. All course materials can be managed through online or regular postal service.

Direct Dealer Stores Zone
24 Hrs Best Seller Category
New Tags Get Cheapest Price Shopping
Benefit Buy Direct Directory
Inter Brand Search
My Shopping Centre
Online store Review Directory
Only New Release Products

Online Anthropology Schools, colleges, and universities offer degrees in Anthropology at various levels. Students completing online BA (Bachelor of Arts) or BS (Bachelor of Science) degrees in Anthropology have come to understand the diversities found in human cultures, how these variations developed, and have gained an appreciation of cultures and world views other than their own.

MA (Master of Arts) and MS (Master of Science) students will study more in-depth concepts of cultural and behavioral theory and designs and methods used for Anthropology research.

Anthropology Online Schools

Online Anthropology Schools focus their courses on understanding and development of enlightened perspectives on cultural and behavioral diversity. Anthropology, as a discipline, endeavors to identify universal human characteristics and cultural ethics, and to apply gained knowledge to effect social change. Online Anthropology Schools provide insights and tools to appropriately evaluate behavior and cultural diversity.

Online Anthropology School programs provide BA and BS students with basic courses in sociology and biology, and methods used for identification and analysis of social structures, patterns, and problems. Students progress to specializations chosen in various areas for large-scale or small-scale study of historical and ancient cultural influences on the present, modern cultural systems, cultural effects of technology, and many others. Anthropology students will examine possible ways to positively affect cultural and organizational behavior.

MA and MS degree programs in Online Anthropology Schools provide for the study of influences of geography, immigration, forensics, organizations, ecology, politics, economy, religions, evolution, and many other subjects affecting modern day cultures.

Professions in Anthropology fields encompass the social sciences research, administration, developing services, managing, counseling, and consulting for a wide range of employers. Incomes generally range from ,000 to ,000, depending on education and employer.

If you are interested in learning more about Online Anthropology Schools and other types of schools, please search our site for more information and resources.

DISCLAIMER: Above is a GENERAL OVERVIEW and may or may not reflect specific practices, courses and/or services associated with ANY ONE particular school(s) that is or is not advertised on SchoolsGalore.com.

Copyright 2006 - All Rights Reserved
Michael Bustamante, in association with Media Positive Communications, Inc. for SchoolsGalore.com

Notice to Publishers: Please feel free to use this article in your Ezine or on your Website; however, ALL links must remain intact and active.

Anthropology Online Schools

Michael Bustamante is a staff writer for Media Positive Communications, Inc. in association with SchoolsGalore.com. Find Colleges, Universities, Vocational Schools, and Online Schools at SchoolsGalore.com; your educational resource to locate schools.

mobile phone watches Buy Shure Pg14 Pg30 Wireless Headset System K7 Discounted Discounted Bronze Finish Lion Fountain Hot Deals Tektronix Power Supply 18V 5A 90W

Herbert Gintis: The Flip Side of Altruism

Economist Herbert Gintis studies why people do the things they do using game theory and mathematical models. An emeritus professor at the University of Massachusetts, Gintis has also taught at the Santa Fe Institute and Barnard College. The author of Game Theory Evolving and co-author of the forthcoming title, The Cooperative Species: Human Sociality and its Evolution, Gintis believes that most people are predisposed to cooperate and be altruistic, and they aren't even aware of it. Altruistic tendencies have a nastier flip side as well, but that's all part of what makes society work, according to Gintis.

Direct Dealer Stores Zone
24 Hrs Best Seller Category
New Tags Get Cheapest Price Shopping
Benefit Buy Direct Directory
Inter Brand Search
My Shopping Centre
Online store Review Directory
Only New Release Products

How did you get interested in studying altruism?

I studied all of the behavioral sciences -- biology, psychology, sociology, political science, economics, and anthropology -- and I thought that it was crazy that these fields could have completely different theories of how people behave. Not only different, they're contradictory. We're part of the Network of the Nature and Evolution Process. About 18 people work for it -- economists, biologists, anthropologists, psychologists. We use the experimental game theory to see what people want to do, what their preferences are.

Herbert Gintis: The Flip Side of Altruism

What have you found about human beings and their preferences?

Economists have a model of choice that's called the rational actor model. It generally assumes that people are selfish. In fact, that's a very important part of it. And one of the things we wanted to do is test whether or not that is the case. We found out that it is not the case. It's a rather very interesting phenomenon: People tend to be predisposed to cooperate with others at a cost to themselves as long as others will also cooperate. And people are willing to punish others when they do not cooperate.

The reason humans are so successful is normally attributed to the fact that they're smart. The reason they're smart is because humans operate in complex groups. The reason they can operate in complex groups is that they have strong reciprocity: Not only do they share, but they're willing to punish non-sharers. If you look at the whole range of social species, you find that punishing is very important.

Take bees. You always think of the hive as the big social collective, everybody does what they're supposed to do. But that's not true. Workers often try to lay eggs, even though only the queen is supposed to lay eggs. If workers lay eggs, there are other workers that run around, eat the eggs, then punish the workers that laid the eggs. Wherever you find cooperation, you'll also find punishment. Think of your own body. Each cell has its own self-interest to multiply. Why don't they go berserk? How do you get cells to cooperate? The answer is, you punish cells that don't cooperate. As far as we know, there is no other vertebrate species that punishes. Humans are by far the most social vertebrate species and we argue that that's why humans are so cooperative.

How do you define altruism? In your work, you speak of reciprocity. What is that?

An act is altruistic if it benefits another at a cost to yourself, where there is no possible mechanism whereby you could gain even in the long run somehow: Long term benefit to someone else with a long term cost to yourself. We call that altruism. By the way, it could be a long-term benefit to a group at a long-term cost to yourself. We want a definition of altruism that isn't subjective and also extends to animals. There is altruism in animals. It almost always depends on kin groups -- that is, you're nice to your kids, which is a biological objective.

There are really two types of reciprocity. Generally, before the work we did, reciprocity meant I help you if you help me. And that, of course, is not altruism. What we study -- "strong reciprocity" -- is a predisposition to cooperate, even when it's costly, and a predisposition to punish violators, free riders.

The problem with the term "altruism" is that there are many forms of altruism. For instance, unconditional altruism is where I help others no matter what. I just help. That's altruism, but it's not strong reciprocity. Mostly people think altruism is goody-goody or warm and fuzzy. But, the biggest part of making society work is needing to retaliate, wanting to hurt people who hurt you. It's much more important than the precondition to cooperate, because if you don't have punishment, you can't get cooperation. Strong reciprocity can be cooperation and conditional punishment.

So, we believe the heart of altruism is not only the willingness to cooperate and help -- empathy and caring for others -- but also this negative side of human nature: retaliation or retribution.

Let me give you an example that you would not even think is altruistic normally, but is: road rage.

What exactly do you mean by road rage and how is that altruistic?

Pathologically, it's when somebody behaves badly on the road and you shoot them. Usually, though, when people drive through a yellow light or are in a wrong lane, people honk their horns, shake their fists at them. Our argument is that this behavior of getting angry at another driver, who you're never going to see again, has strong reciprocity. It helps keep people honest.

If you don't drive the proper way, some guy honks his horn and you feel humiliated; you've done a bad thing and you got caught. But he didn't do it because he cared about keeping people honest. He honked his horn because he was pissed at you. This is true in subjective altruism. By honking your horn or yelling at someone for doing a bad thing, this is an altruistic act. It might have cost you something, not much. But it keeps the rules of the road going. It keeps people honest, so it's an altruistic act.

You're upholding the norm of fairness by hurting someone who was unfair. But you didn't do it because you wanted to uphold a norm for the group. You did it because you were angry at the guy.

What about when people do something spontaneous and show genuine feelings of empathy?

Our argument is that everybody is altruistic. But for most people if the cost gets sufficiently high, they stop being altruistic.

We argue that everyday life has little bits of altruism all over the place. They're generally not that costly, but they're extremely important. For instance, when I go on an airplane, everyone is nice to each other; they're never going to see each other again. Why be polite? You can imagine if you put chimps on an airplane, it would be a total disaster. Why go through these little amenities: "Can I help you with your bag?" "Let me move for you." "Let me get up so you can get out and go to the bathroom." Think about it. If you put a bunch of sociopaths on an airplane, it would be a disaster. But these little amenities, in everyday life, we tend to help each other even if it doesn't cost that much. This makes society work.

It may be that you really care about the other guy, and very often that's the case. Human beings' notion of empathy is very strong. And that's what altruism is. It's wanting to help people at a cost to yourself -- but also punish people at a cost to yourself when they're behaving in an anti-social manner. And then the question is, how can human beings be this way? No other species is like this. And that's where the biology comes in. You have to show that groups in which you have a strong reciprocator, an altruist, will do better than groups that don't have altruism.

Is that how game theory fits in?

The main thing game theory does is provide a methodology for experiments. After that, you've got all the biology, genetics, sociology. But game theory pervades everything we do. There's a whole theory on that called "behavioral game theory."

Tell us about your recent findings on how altruism is transmitted.

We're basically very hard-nosed mathematical behaviorists. We take the economic model of the rational actor and we put it through the hoops.

Sociologists have a concept called socialization, which means the internalization of norms, which is completely opposite from every other behavior. There's no such thing in biology or economics or political science or anthropology.

It seems to me that the principle of socialization was one of the established behavioral universal principles in academic sociology. What we propose is that human beings have this capacity to be programmed. Humans are the only ones where humans can want things just because they were socialized to want them -- want to be fair, want to share, want to help your group, want to be patriotic, want to be honest, want to be trustworthy, want to be cheerful -- when they are costly to our selves. If you're honest as a principle, that's good for everybody else and it costs you. So being honest is part of strong reciprocity.

Where does this come from?

Within a complex society, the general approach to this is gene-culture co-evolution. In biology, you get genetic information. In sociology or anthropology, you get cultural information. But really, in human society, they go together. Genetic evolution leads to culture. In that culture, given strong reciprocity, you can be rewarded for being nice or for cooperating. So cultural evolution can lead to genetic evolution. Human beings become nicer and more reciprocal and more honest. So, you get this whole dialectic back-and-forth between cultural evolution and genetic evolution and the product is human beings.

As a result, you get this very complex society, where if individuals don't learn to share or learn to be honest, the system punishes them. People who are programmable, then, are more fit than people who are not programmable.

So in that context of programmability, socialization -- the internalization of norms -- becomes the interest of fitness. If you brush your teeth because your parents told you to or you turned the other cheek, because in the long run that pays off, then you are more fit than your neighbors who are sociopaths.

The interesting thing is, once you get people who are programmable, you can program them to do a lot of things, even things that aren't in their interest. You can program people to be honest, even when it's in their self-interest sometimes not to be honest. A lot of people won't be honest. By programmability, you can get people to be more altruistic than they would ever be if they were self-interested. Now we have all these suicide bombers. That's completely obvious. You get these people who are programmable and you can program them to be willing to commit suicide. You could never do that to an animal, not willingly. Our argument is that this is one more kind of collective social mechanism that allows us to cooperate.

People don't like to see others suffer. After 9/11, you saw in NYC, the whole city rise up, people helping each other. It's just a spontaneous empathy. Empathy itself is the result of gene-culture coevolution, because, again, people are empathetic; They help in the short run because they feel like it; they feel good helping. But in the long run it helps them because people help back or some phenomenon allows empathy to be fitness enhancing. I think that's more important than what they were taught by their parents. But some of that can come in too.

Herbert Gintis: The Flip Side of Altruism

Chhavi Sachdev is international editor at Science & Theology News [http://www.stnews.org].

watch mobile phone Hot Deals Tektronix Power Supply 18V 5A 90W

An Introduction to the Theoretical Perspectives of Sociology

Sociologists have covered a broad amount of material in their accumulated studies. Some, like Karl Marx, studied broad topics related to the whole of societies. He theorized that the root of human misery lies in the uneven distribution of wealth in society. Others, like Emile Durkheim, focused on more concise topics. He concentrated much of his effort on determining why certain sects of people are more apt to commit suicide than others. Still others, like Max Weber, studied patterns in culture throughout history to determine how much a social group can affect one's life. Though many sociologists study different topics, all use their recorded data to produce theories. These theories suggest how certain parts of the world fit together and how they work. If you break theories down further, you can sort them into three distinct categories: symbolic interactionism, functional analysis, and conflict theory. All three can use different observations to prove the same point.

Firstly, symbolic interactionism. This theory initially stated that one evaluates himself based on the conduct of others. As years went on, symbolic interactionism also showed that people use symbols to encapsulate their experiences. Symbolic interaction is generally conducted at the Microsociological level. That is - it examines small scale patterns of social interaction. For example. If you think of a family member as an aunt or an uncle, you will behave in a certain way. If the person is a best friend, you will carry yourself quite differently. Without symbolic interaction, we would have no way to define relationships, and we would be reduced to a level of animal interaction. In short, symbolic interactionists analyze how our behaviors depend on the ways we define ourselves and others.

Anthropology Sociology

Fashion Survey Survey Info Plus Gifts Survey Today Survey Daily Survey Review Survey Survey Station Survey Center Refurbish Survey Top List Survey Trends Survey Newest Survey Produvt Survey New Items Studio Hotlist Center Newest Center Products Center Shop Center Trends Center Reviews Center Gift Center Direct Info Plus Tools Plus Search Station Review Estimate Estimate Search Estimate Ideas Ideas Premium Green Stuido Daily Resale Review Studio Gift Resale Store Direct Station Today Station Daily Studio New York Plus

Functional analysis basically states that society is a whole made up of independent parts that work together. A sociologist that was mentioned earlier in the paper, Emile Durkheim, was one of the most prominent sociologists associated with this view. His work noted that, although the whole of society works together, individual sects of people can be more likely to do certain things than others. Most notable of all his studies is likely his work done on finding social factors that may contribute to the likelihood of a person committing suicide. He observed that how strong or weak social bonds are have a strong impact on suicide rate in a social group. For example, women and protestants are more apt to commit suicide because their ties to their social groups are weaker. Also, he noted that if bonds are too strong, the risk for suicide increases as well. A man who loses his spouse may be more likely to commit suicide, because he sees death as a better option than living without his wife. In this case, their feelings were deeply integrated.

An Introduction to the Theoretical Perspectives of Sociology

Finally, there is conflict theory. This theory came as a result of Karl Marx's studies on social equality. He concluded that the key to human history is class struggle. This meant that one small group of people controls the means, while a much larger group of workers is exploited for their benefit. This, of course, was recorded at a time when worker's rights, labor laws, and capitalism were in their infancy. For the most part, workers were at the mercy of their employers. Marx suggested that if all the wealth was shared evenly, humans could coexist in harmony.

These three theories not only explained human interaction when they were created many years ago, but can also be applied today to more modern situations. Take Emile Durkheim. His studies on human interaction stated that the group of people one is surrounded by determines how he carries himself. If Durkheim were alive today, and he intended to undertake a study of gangs, he would likely start out by observing what type of external factors lead to an individual's desire to join one. External forces, such as parental neglect, lack of friendship, and lack of social activity could all be considered legitimate reasons for one to join a gang. Upon entering, Durkheim would follow several gang members and see how drastically a person's values would change in order to conform to the lifestyle of the gang. In short, he would show that weak bonds with family fuel a desire for strong bonds with another source - whether that source is a positive or a negative influence.

The three sub levels of Theoretical Perspectives help us to better understand how sociologists go about crafting their theories, and how they will experiment to attempt to prove them. While there is no single way to go about producing sociological theories, each one of the sub categories listed in this essay can offer a legitimate explanation for almost any sociological issue.

An Introduction to the Theoretical Perspectives of Sociology

mobile phone watches Cheap Dispenser Kit For Liquid Detergent Low Price Mmf Industries Tamper Evident Cash Bags